This afternoon, we told you about a summer associate from Harvard Law School who has already been fired from his firm. After the story went up, the HLS 2L called Above the Law to “set the record straight.” He has a different version of what went on during his brief stay at McDermott, Will & Emery.

According to the former summer associate, who asked that we maintain his anonymity (so please don’t name him in the comments), he was let go because his work visa hadn’t yet come through. As many of you know, non-citizens need to have a work visa in order to work — and get paid — in America.

But according to the HLS 2L, his work authorization papers were delayed because MWE didn’t tell him he’d be able to start working as a summer associate until late February. In case you’re wondering, you cannot apply for a work visa until you know when you will actually be working (in terms of specific dates). The HLS 2L did apply for the work visa in late February, but he’s still waiting for the papers to come through.

As the HLS 2L put it:

I was never officially a summer at McDermott, so I really wasn’t fired.

More details about the HLS 2L’s “heated conversation” with a MWE partner, after the jump.

* The Cuban embargo has to be close to its end. I can’t wait to gamble gambol through Havana. [Transracial]

* The Chairman of the Bar Council of India received a lot of criticism for disparaging lawyers who bill a lot of hours to “work like a clerk.” [Legally India]

* Is Obama ready to stand against Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell? Or is he just talking tough? [Law Dork 2.0]

* Lawyers don’t lie for money. We are just masters of suspending disbelief — for money. [The Fat Bigot]

* The Mark Sanford saga is progressing very nicely. [Huffington Post]

* Michael Jackson’s will does exist. [TMZ]

* A thought controlled wheelchair. I can’t wait to see the tort actions arising out of this bad boy: “I didn’t mean to ram into the bipedal individual who was taunting me, I just thought about mowing him down and it happened.” [The Stimulist]

Rising 3Ls at the University of Texas School of Law received a rather matter-of-fact message from their career services office:

OCI Process Overview

Employer registration closes July 1, 2009. The number of scheduled interview rooms is down overall from last year, with a drop of about 45 percent for employers seeking 3Ls.

That’s not so surprising, is it? Just your average, everyday email explaining that recruitment for 3Ls has FALLEN OFF OF A FREAKING CLIFF!

Arguably, more 3Ls than usual will be forced into 3L interviewing (unless you really believe, contrary to some observers, that offer rates will be around close to 100% for current summer associates).

More job seekers + Fewer employers = Recipe for disaster.

After the jump, UT tipsters weigh in.

One of our favorite law school deans is stepping down. Dean Mark A. Sargent — best known for L’Affaire Peanut Girl, and more recently gracing these pages after memorably quipping in a school-wide email that “The internet really is a type of hell!” — is departing as dean of Villanova Law.

One student’s reaction to the news:

We did NOT, contrary to popular belief, celebrate like munchkins [rejoicing in] the Wicked Witch’s death when the “Peanut Girl” transferred — but we are definitely doing so now (unless, of course, Dean Sargent is ill — in which case we wish him the best).

Sadly, Dean Sargent may be ill; he is stepping down for “personal and medical reasons.” We wish him a speedy recovery. We also hope his successor is similarly skilled in the use of the “reply all” function.

Read the announcement, from Villanova President Peter Donohue, after the jump.

We’re getting very close to having 100 U.S. Senators. The AP reports:

The Minnesota Supreme Court has ordered that Democrat Al Franken be certified as the winner of the state’s long-running Senate race.

The state’s top court rejected a legal challenge from Republican Norm Coleman, whose options for regaining the Senate seat are dwindling.

Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty promised to certify the winner based on the court’s unanimous decision.

Al Franken is now poised to assume his seat in the Senate. Will Norm Coleman appeal to SCOTUS? Even if he does, will Franken be seated as a Senator? Didn’t this election end eight months ago?

Update (4:03): Norm Coleman accepts the loss and will not appeal the Minnesota Supreme Court ruling to SCOTUS. He congratulates Al Franken.

Court paves way for Franken to join Senate [MSNBC.com]
Minnesota court rules Democrat Al Franken won Senate seat [Reuters]

Since the recession hit the American economy with full force, Weil Gotshal has received some very high profile work. But it is not immune from the economic problems within the legal industry. The firm recently fired nearly 80 staffers, and in March the firm deferred some of its incoming first years until 2011.

Today brings more unfortunate news for Weil Gotshal employees. According to an internal communication obtained by Above the Law, the firm is closing its office in Austin. One partner, sixteen associates, and eleven staffers will be affected by the move.

The partner, Kevin Kudlac, will be relocating to Weil’s Houston office. All the associates and staff have been offered an opportunity to transfer to one of Weil’s other offices. If they don’t transfer, they’ll receive severance benefits.

Good luck, displaced Texans. I hear Houston is lovely this time of year.

Check out a screen shot of the Weil email after the jump.

Summer associates have landed at offices across the nation. They’re working harder this year, even if some of the work is fake, and they’re eating out less often. But the Biglaw recruits are still having fun — sometimes too much fun.

We’ve been asking you about the big events for this year’s summers — concerts, movie previews, booze cruises, etc. Look out for contest finalists soon!

Cadwalader may have already established itself as a front runner in the competition. Last week, the firm took its summers to see a Mets game. Afterwards, some of the attorneys and summers went from Shea to shady. [FN1] From a knowledgeable source:

After the game, some of the male associates took some of the male summers out for some “after-event” bonding. The problem with this bonding is that it was a trip to the strip club. I’m not sure if the firm knew about the afterparty event or if it was sanctioned by or expensed to the firm, but this certainly seems to send a message of exclusion to women; or at least — even if any female summers attended (which none did) — that the firm not only tolerated but supported the objectification / degradation of women that occurs at these venues.

The firm was aware of the outing, but it doesn’t support these Cadwalader cads. The official response, after the jump.

Man down! We’re not even into July, and it seems that one summer associate has already gotten himself fired. (We’re fairly sure it was a him, but please correct us if we’re wrong.)

Generally SAs are terrified this summer, and therefore on their best behavior. But one fellow apparently didn’t get the memo. Interestingly enough, according to multiple sources, the fired summer is a student at the hallowed Harvard Law School.

Details are a little sketchy, so please treat this as an early draft. The story will surely evolve, as summer associate stories often do. E.g., Skadden Cristal Boy (original version here, alternate version here); Kirkland & Ellis’s Bruised Booze Cruiser (original version here, alternate version here); the Sapphic Smoochers (compare the different versions of the story by scrolling down through the Lindquist & Vennum archives).

Here’s the abridged version:

There are rumors floating around among HLS students that a summer got himself fired. As far as details, I had heard that he talked back to a partner.

A more detailed account, suggesting that alcohol was involved, after the jump.

American Lawyer has released its A-List for 2009. The rankings try to measure the qualities that make an elite law firm:

This list, which we launched in 2003, aims to measure and quantify the qualities that define an elite law firm, making an effort to look beyond profits. We examine four factors: revenue per lawyer, commitment to pro bono, diversity among lawyers, and associate training and satisfaction. Our formula gives more weight to the first two factors; we double a firm’s scores for revenue per lawyer and pro bono, and then add scores for diversity and associate satisfaction.

This year’s A-List? The elite of the elite? The top three firms are:

1. Munger, Tolles & Olson
2. Hughes Hubbard & Reed
3. Latham & Watkins

I’ll pause to give laid off Latham associates an opportunity to finish screaming. Please return after the jump.

Yesterday morning, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in the case American Needle v. National Football League (pdf, p.3) for purposes of determining whether the NFL clubs’ collective licensing of individual club trademarks is exempt from antitrust scrutiny under the single entity defense. The Supreme Court’s decision to hear this case was likely influenced by the fact that it marks one of just a few times that both a plaintiff and defendant have requested the Court’s review.

Earlier this month, the United States Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission had filed an amicus brief recommending that the Supreme Court deny certiorari. The United States had argued the Seventh Circuit’s holding in American Needle did not conflict with existing case law—a view with which most sports-antitrust scholars disagree.

For those who have not been following the American Needle case, the original plaintiff, American Needle Inc., had for more than twenty years maintained a non-exclusive license to design and manufacture headgear bearing the NFL clubs’ names and logos. Then, nine years ago, the NFL clubs decided to offer an exclusive license to American Needle’s main rival, Reebok.

Upon being foreclosed from the ability to sell NFL headgear, American Needle sued the NFL clubs in the Northern District of Illinois, contending that the new NFL licensing arrangement violated Section 1 of the Sherman Act by illegally restraining trade in the market for purchasing rights to NFL logos. The NFL clubs, in turn, responded by not only alleging that their licensing arrangement was pro-competitive under antitrust law’s Rule of Reason, but also by contending that the NFL clubs combined to form a single-entity that was entirely exempt from antitrust scrutiny. Both the district court and the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals granted summary judgment to the NFL clubs based on the single-entity theory.

But can all 32 NFL teams act as one? Analysis after the jump.

* Mission Accomplished? [CNN]

* Doesn’t “Velvet Revolution” sound like a musical band, instead of a collection of angry lawyers administering vigilante justice? [The Blog of the Legal Times]

* Mayoral control of New York City schools could end tonight if the New York State Senate doesn’t act. But hey, politicians acting like children can’t very well care about children. This is a good time to learn the word “mishigas.” [Huffington Post]

* Was Bernie Madoff six times more evil than the Jeff Skilling? [Bloomberg]

* Remote DVRs are okay. I suggest television advertisers seriously consider “product placement.” [Interactive TV Today]

* Rhode Island lawmakers want to change the name of the state. But they don’t want to drop the “Rhode,” or the “Island.” [New York Times]

* Queens is deadly. [Daily News]

* Maybe commenters should stop hiding behind anonymity? [What About Clients?]

* In case you are wondering, I am not the only one pondering whether or not Bernie Madoff can make it in prison. [Dealbreaker]

* Here’s a little free help from LexisNexis. This reminds me of the brilliant Scooner Tuna solution at the end of Mr. Mom. [LexisNexis]

* SCOTUS stats! Here’s an end of the term tally. [SCOTUSblog]

* Here’s how a professional comedian writes a law blog. [Jeremy Schachter’s in Law School]

* Somebody got chased with a knife for calling Michael Jackson a talented musician. This country is out of control. [Quiz Law]

* Some lawyers say Twitter is a fad. Other lawyers are already trying to make money and generate business from Twitter, just in case it is here to stay.
[Marketing Strategy And The Law via Blawg Review]

First years to 100K and an “apprenticeship”?

In the past two months, we’ve reported on three firms instituting an apprenticeship model for first year associates: Drinker Biddle, Howrey, and Frost Brown Todd. “Apprentices” start at the firm at a lower salary and are not billed out to clients, billed out at a lower rate than normal associates, or billed out for lower total hours. It sounds like an apprentice is a “paralegal plus.” Of course, that “plus” includes a J.D. and its accompanying law school debt.

Still, when we polled you last week, almost 70% of ATL readers who voted said they were in favor of Howrey’s $100K-plus-professional-training apprenticeship.

The National Law Journal (subscription) has an extensive piece on apprenticeships (noting two other firms that have instituted the practice — labor firm Ford & Harri­son and Dallas’s Strasburger & Price):

These firms are putting new recruits through additional apprenticeship programs that they say will better train their attorneys for life at a law firm and for handling clients. Think of it as the equivalent of a medical residency, only with suits instead of scrubs.

The latest — and so far largest — firm to move to an apprenticeship model, 659-lawyer Howrey, announced its program last week. Starting next year, first-years at the firm will get a pay cut — from $160,000 to $100,000 in base pay plus a $25,000 bonus to pay down law school loans — and they’ll spend a good portion of their time attending classes with partners and shadowing them on client matters. The apprenticeship period will last two years.

Are law students really like medical students, in need of on-the-job training in order to operate in the real world? If apprenticeships become widespread — which admittedly seems unlikely once the tough economic times are behind us — should the training at a firm mean one less year in law school? Firm salaries are going down, but law school tuition is going up. Maybe it’s time to rebalance.

A round-up of the salaries for BigLaw apprentices, and a poll on how law schools should be reacting to deflating salaries, after the jump.

Oh Charlotte. Oh Queen City. My how global economic crisis denuded your legal industry.

Maybe it is time for a comeback? The Charlotte Observer reports that a legal services firm is poised to hire 100 Charlotte based attorneys:

Unfortunately, we’re talking about document review attorneys:

DiscoverReady, which analyzes e-mails and electronic documents for law firms and corporate legal departments, is opening the office on Trade Street uptown in mid-June. The company has already hired about two dozen workers and will hire others in waves throughout the year, said Jim Wagner Jr., DiscoverReady’s chief executive officer.

About a third of the positions will be full time; the others will be temporary and contract jobs, he said. Most of the company’s workers are attorneys, but company officials are also looking for project managers, office staff and other employees.

All and all, isn’t this good news for the Charlotte legal economy? More details after the jump.

As we have previously reported, DePaul College of Law Dean, Glen Weissenberger was ousted after he sent a letter to the ABA as part of the school’s accreditation review. At first blush, it looked like a university politics fight between Dean Weissenberger and DePaul University Provost, Helmut Epp. But now it appears that the acrimony between the Dean and the Provost goes all the way to eleven.

Provost Epp held a meeting with DePaul College of Law students, and The Shark reported that notes from the meeting ended up on Facebook. Tax Prof Blog has summarized the main allegations that Provost Epp leveled at Dean Weissenberger:

* University officials gave Dean Weissenberger the opportunity to resign, but he refused.

* Dean Weissenberger consistently spent more than the law school budget allowed, in excess of $1 million.

* Dean Weissenberger filled four positions at the law school without permission from the provost.

* Dean Weissenberger’s decision to contact the ABA was “highly irregular” and “making mischief.”

But in this mud fight, the Provost isn’t getting the last word. After the jump, the dean responds to the Provost.

Back in May, we reported that Pillsbury Winthrop wanted some of its incoming first year associates to defer until January 2010, some to defer until 2011, and others to take $60,000 to go away entirely.

The firm couched all of these options as “voluntary.” But notwithstanding the firm’s choice of language, we reported that Pillsbury needed at least 22 of its incoming class of 54 associates to take the go away money, or defer for a year.

Pillsbury said that it would announce which associates were starting in January 2010 on June 26th. That was Friday.

But according to my iPhone “date and time” application (how people did anything before the iPhone, I do not know) it is Monday, June 29th. And there is still no word from Pillsbury. Here’s one tipster’s report:

As of this AM, still no news from the firm. Yet again, evidence they can’t be trusted - or don’t care about incoming associates. Their written letters to us said we would know by by Friday. I hope this is not how the firm conducts business with clients.

Should Pillsbury associates expect the firm to actually tell them when they can start? Or should they just start hanging out on the Acela and hope to catch a clue on the wind?

More reactions after the jump.

Bernie Madoff has been sentenced to 150 years.

Judge Denny Chin said that the sentence was necessary to deter other people from entering into these kinds of schemes

The Judge apparently said that he was struck that there was no letter written in support of Bernie Madoff. On the other hand, the judge received 141 pages of letters from Madoff victims.

Madoff allegedly said:

They have accused me and my wife of not being sympathetic. She cries every night, I am also tormented.

Umm … crying doesn’t make you sympathetic. I think instead of turning on the waterworks, Madoff should try not stealing billions of dollars.

But Madoff did apparently say: “I am sorry.”

But the pitchfork rally doesn’t have to end here. Next up: what prison will Madoff be heading to? A “club-fed” facility, or someplace where Madoff might expect “more bareback.”

For extensive and ongoing coverage of L’Affaire Madoff, surf over to our sister site, Dealbreaker.

The U.S. Supreme Court decided Ricci v. DeStefano today.

The breaking news coming off of the television is that the Court reversed the Second Circuit and ruled in favor of the New Haven firefighters. Judge Sonia Sotomayor was on that panel, so her reversal rate just went up.

Here’s the opinion from the Court via SCOTUSblog. The vote was 5-4, with Kennedy writing for the majority and Ginsburg dissenting.

Right now I’m watching Eliot Spitzer trying to explain it to an amped up Dylan Ratigan. I always wondered what it would like to feed a person coffee mixed with Red Bull while being electro-shocked.

Would this case have been more interesting if New Haven had certified the results of the exam, and then minorities sued the city under Title VII? Random minorities v. City of New Haven would seem more on point about whether or not the firefighter test was discriminatory.

Ricci v. DeStefano.pdf [PDF]

[Ed. note: Above the Law has teamed up with Law Shucks. Law Shucks has done excellent work translating all of the layoff news into user-friendly charts and graphs: the Layoff Tracker.]

Forgive us for sounding like a broken record. There are only so many ways to say the same thing about US unemployment: the rate of new filings has slowed down, but overall unemployment continues to rise. Unfortunately, it looks like last week’s brief drop was just a blip in an otherwise unbroken trend of worsening data.

That pretty much mirrors the trend at law firms - fewer layoffs but still no hiring (with one exception).

More detail, after the jump.

* Bernie Madoff will be sentenced today. Mmm … revenge justice. [Daily News]

* There’s a “legacy of litigation” that will survive Michael Jackson. [National Law Journal]

* The Coup d’état in Honduras is the first Central American coup since the end of the Cold War. [New York Times]

* R.I.P., Billy Mays. [CNBC]

* Maria Belen Chapur (Mark Sanford’s girlfriend) says she’s pretty sure who hacked into her email account, but she can’t say. [CNN]

* Is it time for New York State to have a full blown constitutional convention? Maybe downstate New York should just secede from upstate New York. Then we can rename upstate “East Dakota” and everything will make sense. [Newsday]

This morning, we mentioned the University of Illinois College of Law admissions scandal. It appears that former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich pressured the University of Illinois Chancellor, Richard Herman, and Heidi Hurd, former dean of the University of Illinois College of Law, to admit underqualified students who were politically connected. In exchange for admitting those students, university officials attempted to obtain jobs for graduates of the College of Law.

The Chicago Tribune reports the results of its investigation into the law school:

The documents show for the first time efforts to seek favors — in this case, jobs — for admissions, the most troubling evidence yet of how Illinois’ entrenched system of patronage crept into the state’s most prestigious public university.

They also detail the law school’s system for handling “Special Admits,” students backed by the politically connected, expanding the scope of a scandal prompted by a Chicago Tribune investigation.

The paper has published the incriminating emails (PDF) it has uncovered. Warning, these emails are not safe for naive people who are unaccustomed with the “Chicago style” of getting things done. Here’s an exchange between the Chancellor and the Dean about what jobs would be appropriate in exchange for admitting politically connected students:

I suppose there are worse things than a dean trying to aggressively secure employment for her law graduates can’t pass the bar and can’t think. Of course, you’d hope that the dean would be even more focused on educating students so that they can pass the bar and, you know, think — but why cry over spilled milk?

In fact, some Illinois law graduates we spoke with had a very positive impression of Dean Hurd. Depending, of course, on what you mean by positive.

Some student impressions of the dean, and more emails, after the jump.

* Don’t forget, on Monday we’ll be trying to help you secure your financial future. And we’ll be doing it for free. [Above the Law]

* The Chief Justice was not a huge fan of Michael Jackson back in the day. Or a “newcomer who goes by the name, Prince.” I would love to know what musicians Chief Justice Roberts did like back in the day. Journey? No, no, it’s gotta be Winger. [New York Times]

* The joys of being a contract attorney, according to David Lat. [Legal Research & Writing Pro]

* If Michael Jackson ever gave advice to young lawyers, it might sound something like this. [Young Lawyers Blog]

* LGBT is giving the Olsen-Boies lawsuit a needed jolt. [Law Dork 2.0]

* I still don’t understand what Justice Thomas’s was trying to do with his dissent in the strip search case. I am not alone. [Volokh Conspiracy]

* Should department stores hold a trademark right over their models’ breasts? I don’t think so. It seems to me that if they liked it, they should have put a ring on it. [Fashionista]

* You’d think that if you called 911 and reported that Michael Jackson was not breathing, you’d say “MICHAEL JACKSON is not breathing. Send a God Damn helicopter and a spare Jackson brother in case we need parts,” as opposed to “uhh … a gentleman … is not breathing.” [Popsquire]

The Moor is back — and we’re not talking Othello. From Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly:

Three months after the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination dismissed her complaint, a former Bingham McCutchen associate has fired back with a gender-discrimination suit against the Boston firm she left in 2008.

In a highly charged complaint filed in Suffolk Superior Court on June 23, Michelle A. Moor, who now works at Kotin, Crabtree & Strong, alleges that she was involuntarily drugged with a “roofie” during a Dec. 14, 2007, firm-sponsored holiday party….

In a written statement, Bingham’s senior communications manager, Claire Papanastasiou, said the firm acted sensitively, responsibly and fairly at all times.

“We are disappointed that [Moor] persists in pursuing baseless claims against the firm, particularly in light of the [MCAD’s] April 9 dismissal of her complaint for lack of probable cause,” she wrote.

Will Moor v. Bingham McCutchen LLP provide endless entertainment, a la Charney v. Sullivan & Cromwell? Or will it fizzle out fast, a la Young v. Covington & Burling? Stay tuned.

Former Bingham associate files Superior Court suit against firm [Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly]
Moor v. Bingham McCutchen LLP [PDF]

Earlier: Roofiegate Resolved: Bingham Prevails, Complaint Dismissed

Will he stay or will he go? For the longest time, Judge Samuel Kent (S.D. Tex.), the federal judge who pleaded guilty to obstruction of justice in connection with his molestation of two female court employees, has been playing games about his departure from the bench. But now he has finally raised the white flag, resigning effective on Tuesday, June 30.

To recap: Judge Kent initially said he was retiring on “disability” — which would have allowed him to keep receiving his $174,000 judicial salary for the rest of his life. After that didn’t go over well, he announced he was resigning — but with an effective date of June 1, 2010. As Professor Jonathan Turley and others observed, it was a cynical move on Judge Kent’s part: he was effectively betting that it would take a long time to impeach him, during which time he would continue to draw his six-figure salary — and perhaps the knowledge that he’d be leaving the bench anyway would cause Congress to shelve impeachment proceedings.

But things didn’t quite turn out the way Judge Kent had hoped. Read more, after the jump.

Gentleman, how emasculated would you feel if your future father-in-law shuttled your bride down the aisle, and then, instead of pecking her on the cheek and handing her over, actually turned around and performed the wedding ceremony? Talk about control issues. That’s exactly what this groom endured last Sunday, as he was married by his father-in-law, United States Federal District Judge Jed S. Rakoff.

The Rakoff wedding didn’t make our final three. Neither did a couple of lesbian unions, a WGWAG, and several other worthy contenders. Here are the three who made the finals:

1. Devon Quasha and Jeffrey Thorn

2. Saralisa Brau and William Van Horne

3. Linda Cho and James Brennan

More about these impressive legal-eagle newlyweds, after the jump.

It’s been quiet here at Above The Law in terms of chatter about the summer associate experience. SAs seem a wee bit scared to reach out to us this year. We’re trying to gather submissions for the SA Event Contest, and we’ve only gotten five submissions! And one is a fishing trip.

Is the summer associate experience really that lame this year? Or are you all just terrified to send us an e-mail with a little braggadocio about your summer events? There are workarounds, you know. One SA printed an event announcement and sent it to us snail mail style.

(Just a reminder that all tips are anonymous, so send us more submissions. Just do it from your personal account, or on Facebook, or via carrier pigeon.)

Okay. Okay. We understand your reticence. SAs are stressed out about getting job offers in this competitive environment. Georgetown Law sent out a memo to its students predicting that most firms will be offering jobs to 50 to 80% of their summer associates. They then offered some advice for current SAs, which basically consisted of “things to think about doing in case you don’t get an offer.” Georgetown also advised checking out a piece that appeared in Massachusetts Lawyer Weekly: Some Words of Advice for Summer Associates of 2009 [PDF].

In case you didn’t surf over to it, we’ll boil it down for you, along with some of our own advice, after the jump.

Wednesday, I openly begged for some good news coming out of Detroit. It appears somebody was listening. Today, Detroit City Councilwoman Monica Conyers pleaded guilty to bribery.

I know what you are thinking, how could a public official admitting to selling her vote be a good thing? Well, it’s great news for the city because it means that there is one less corrupt politician menacing Motown.

And “menacing” is probably the most appropriate way to describe the wife of Congressman John Conyers. We’ve written about her before, last year she called the city council president “Shrek,” and an eighth grader had to try to teach her about etiquette. Since then she’s a lovely time: hiring family members for staff positions and scolding the media for harassment.

Getting her out of office has to give the whole city a lift.

The scandal that brought her down saw Conyers sell her swing vote on the city council for approximately $6,000. That is also great news for Detroit, it shows that business are willing to invest at least six large in the city!

Even the ATL commenters kept the good news rolling, after the jump.

Question: Will my Vault 100 firm protect my salary despite the recession?
Answer: You must be using some other kind of 8-ball.

Venable might be Washington, D.C.’s weirdest law firm, but you can’t eat quirky. Yesterday evening, Venable announced pay cuts for everybody. Associates, counsel, staff, non-equity partners, and even equity partners will be affected.

First year associates will be taking the increasingly standard 10% pay cut. But then things get crazy! According to the firm wide memo, most associates and counsel will be taking a wacky 8% pay cut. How adorably off-beat.

* Base compensation for all other associates will be reduced by 8%, although there will be a floor of $150,000 and $155,000 for second year and third year associates, respectively.

* Base compensation for all of counsel will be reduced by 8%.

As one tipster wryly put it:

I guess the salary freeze only meant frozen from going up, eh?

Senior staff will also see their salaries reduced by 8%.

After the jump, Venable partners share the pain.

If you’re looking for opportunities outside the usual suspects — New York, D.C., Chicago, L.A., San Francisco — then this latest Job of the Week may interest you. As usual, it’s brought to you by Lateral Link.

Position(s): Junior litigation associates (2006 - 2008 grads)

Location: North Carolina

Description: This boutique was formed in 2000 as a select cadre of lawyers providing sophisticated legal services to blue-chip clients. With a strong emphasis on customer service, the ten founding lawyers set out to offer premier legal services efficiently, but with the intense involvement of the firm’s most senior partners. Today, the firm’s 27 lawyers provide legal services to more than 30 members of the Fortune 500. The firm continues to attract the finest attorneys with significant trial, appellate, and transactional experience.

For more information on this position, please contact Jordan Abshire, Director, at either jordan.abshire@laterallink.com or 704.899.5549. Jordan is a Director for the Southeast Region, with a focus on Washington, D.C., Charlotte, and Atlanta. Jordan spent three years in private practice in the energy group at Troutman Sanders LLP, after graduating from Harvard Law School and receiving a B.S. in Psychology, summa cum laude, and a B.A. in Political Science, summa cum laude, from Louisiana State University.

[Ed. Note: Those with cat like reflexes will remember that this post appeared briefly last night. We pulled it back to give the King of Pop his due.]

Given the times, any change to the parameters of a firm’s performance reviews are met with great trepidation by associates at the firm. The least firms can do is clearly explain that process by which attorneys will be evaluated for promotion — or termination.

Hogan & Hartson’s chairman, Warren Gorrell Jr., has been making the rounds and talking to associates about the firm’s new associate evaluation process. The plan was implemented back in April, right around the time Hogan put a number of associates on a lower billing-lower compensation track.

Gorrell told us that the meetings coincide with his communication to the Hogan associate’s committee about the firm’s quarterly partner meetings. Gorrell was able to provide us with some additional information about how associates at Hogan would be evaluated, going forward. Here is what Gorrell explained to his associates, yesterday:

That is the overview. Let’s get to what could cause a person to take an alternate “direction” in their career, after the jump.

For the past week, readers, commenters, tipsters, Steven Hawking and the Dalai lama have all been asking me what is going on with Skadden’s NALP form. If you look at the NALP directory of legal employers, you’ll notice that Skadden’s 2009 starting salary is listed as “TBD” — to be determined.

Well we finally have an official answer from the firm. The statement confirms what off-the-record sources and reasonably sane people have been saying all week: Skadden will still be paying $160,000 to first year associates.

After the jump, check out the firm’s salary statement.

* Many people are still reeling from the news of the death of Michael Jackson. [Rolling Stone]

* The scandal at the University of Illinois law school is bad, it’s really, really bad, you know it. Reports are now surfacing that the school admitted politically connected applicants in exchange for jobs for the law school’s graduates. [Chicago Tribune]

* Mark Sanford did use state funds to see his pretty young thing in Argentina. But he’s going to pay it back. Now he just needs some tender lovin’ care. [New York Times]

* Allen Stanford pleaded “not guilty” yesterday. Allen are you okay? Are you okay, Allen? You’ve been hit by, you’ve been struck by, a smooth criminal? [WSJ Law Blog]

* China disbars human rights lawyers. No message could have been any clearer. [ABA Journal]

* FDA, really bang up job on the Zicam thing. The way you make me feel … is unhealthy. [Bloomberg]

Legendary entertainer Michael Jackson, aka the King of Pop, wasn’t a lawyer. But he certainly generated lots of work for them, thanks to his child molestation charges and financial woes. Not every pop culture icon has their own ATL category tag.

(Sure, MJ didn’t always pay his legal bills on time. But it’s the thought that counts.)

Michael Jackson was 50 at the time of his death. May he rest in peace.

Update: Read Marin’s thoughts on the Gloved One over at True/Slant (here and here).

Michael Jackson Has Beat It [True/Slant]
Michael Jackson Dies [TMZ.com]
Pop icon Michael Jackson is dead [Los Angeles Times]

* Please God, whatever happens, don’t ever let me get fired via Twitter. [Legal Blog Watch]

* Be forewarned, if we simplify the law, it will be easier for “lay” people to understand the law, and pretty soon people won’t need as many lawyers. Do not repeat the mistakes of King James! What is good for society might not be good for our precious faith. [The Atlantic]

* Have you ever been captured by a Romanian terrorist while riding a Ferris wheel? No? Then you should read this account. [Miss Trials]

* Valet parking for students and faculty. [Legal Writing Prof Blog]

* Lastly I also suspect I feel a little vulnerable because this is ground I have never certainly never covered before — so if you have pearls of wisdom on how we figure all this out please let me know … In the meantime please sleep soundly knowing that despite the best efforts of my head my heart cries out for you, your voice, your body, the touch of your lips, the touch of your finger tips and an even deeper connection to your soul. I love you … sleep tight. M [The State]

* Michael Jackson … I can’t even say it. [True/Slant]

SCOTUS ruled today that strip searching middle school students is not cool.

When Arizona school officials suspected an eighth-grade girl of harboring ibuprofen, they made her strip down to her bra and underwear, and then a nurse watched as she shook her bra and shook her underwear to prove there were no pills in her… on her person.

This sounds totally crazy on the Arizona officials’ part, but this girl was a suspicious character. She had been storing “several knives, lighters, a permanent marker, and a cigarette” in her day planner, according to the SCOTUS opinion [PDF]. That combined with Advil sounds like a rampage waiting to happen!

Lets take a look a those who concur, and those who dissent after the jump.

If it wasn’t for places like Texas, we wouldn’t have lawyers like Nelson Skinner.

Regulators, mount up!

Another day, and another firm is retreating from the salaries of the past. Our sources report that Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney has decided to cut associate salaries between 5% and 10%.

The cuts will affect all class years.

Buchanan Ingersoll CEO Jack Barbour furnished Above the Law with this statement. Barbour suggests that the cuts are in part to due to Buchanan’s attempts to keep its billing rates competitive in this recession economy:

The firm generally has reduced associate compensation at a rate of between 5 and 10% per year. Certain associates may receive a higher or lesser reduction based on individual circumstances. This decision was not an easy one, but we feel that it is in the best interest of the firm and our clients to maintain the quality of service our clients have come to expect while keeping our rates at competitive levels.

The firm did not elaborate on what those individual circumstances might be.

Our sources believe the cuts will be based on hours, but you never know. Wouldn’t it be funny if the firm did it alphabetically. Nobody would be expecting that! It’s good to keep people on their toes.

It’s a little surprising that the firm cut salaries while summers are in the office, simply because the summers are only around for a short period of time. Buchanan scaled back this year’s summer program to seven weeks.

But if cutting salaries now saves jobs later, associates and summers might be all for it.

Earlier: Summer Cuts at Buchanan Ingersoll

Remember the Ninth Circuit Curse? We wrote about it back in 2007, noting that “anyone who tries to mess with the Mighty Ninth eventually finds himself (or herself) in deep doo-doo.” Several politicians who have advocated splitting the Ninth Circuit — a sprawling court that can be challenging to administer, to be sure — have found themselves in some form of trouble or another. E.g., Senators Larry Craig, Ted Stevens, and Lisa Murkowski.

Now they’re joined by another. Although his sex scandal is being overshadowed by that of another Republican politician, Nevada Senator John Ensign (pictured) is watching his popularity plummet, after he admitted to an affair with an ex-staffer (who was once on the Ensign payroll, along with her husband). He may face an investigation into his conduct.

If anyone was going to fall victim to the Ninth Circuit Curse, it would be Senator Ensign. As noted on his website, “Senator Ensign has… taken the lead on legislation to split the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.” Not only did he push hard for splitting the circuit, but he actually testified in support of the split, at the time of the last big push for dividing the court.

The full tally of victims, after the jump.

Luckily, none of my critics have the guts to punch me in the face. But I suppose if one of my faceless, nameless tormentors did clock me upside the head — and lived to tell about it — my next move would be to file a really bitchy lawsuit. And then blog about it. Fun times!

It should go without saying that Perez Hilton has taken his alleged assault at the hands of the Black Eyed Peas to the next level. Here’s the introduction to his lawsuit against the Black Eyed Peas’ road manager, Polo Molina:

Of course, Perez uses the lawsuit to get another dig in at the Black Eyed Peas’ new album:

That the Black Eyed Peas’ new album kind of sucked is now a matter of the public record.

But after the jump, Hilton gets to the real point of the matter.

On Monday, we offered you a blind item about a major law firm giving “fake work” to its summer associates. Some commenters thought we were criticizing the practice, but if you go back and read our original post, you won’t find any criticism. To the contrary, we enumerated the advantages of this policy (which found defenders in the comments as well).

We now bring you an update, based on a number of interesting emails we received. Here’s one:

My former firm, Day Berry & Howard [now Day Pitney], did this with first years back in the 80s. Several of us found out we were researching the exact same issue having to do with business trusts. I proposed we do a joint memo and that’s what we did. I don’t think they did that again.

And here’s a second:

Fake-work has been happening for years. I have given it to summers at the two firms I’ve been at and have practiced this art since 2005…. [T]his practice will greatly increase this year.

It is very easy, especially in areas like tax, where you can give a summer associate a discrete set of facts year after year (sans client names) and see if the summer can get to the answer you already know is right (or find some of the authorities that are directly on point). I actually think it is a GREAT way to test a summer’s research and writing ability without having to take as fact the lame “I couldn’t find very much on point” excuse. Of course, it is essential that the summer not know you gave him/her fake work until he/she does a spotty job and then you hand them the memo you (or a former summer associate) wrote so that they can see that they should have put a bit more effort in getting the project right before handing it in. In prior years, it was fun to see the sense of dread come across an SA’s face if they did, in fact, half-ass it and you caught them in the act (since the SA would likely get an offer anyway). This summer, pulling something like this would probably bring the SA to tears or worse.

I gave three separate fake work projects to summers back when I was at Locke Lord. The partners absolutely knew I was doing it and liked the comparison potential that the practice fostered. The practice was not widespread when I was doing it.

Additional discussion, plus the name of the firm that was the subject of the original blind item, after the jump.

Back in May, we reported that DLA Piper decided to cut its associates’ salaries. Initially it was a 20% cut on some associates, but after our report the firm moved down to a 10%, across the board, salary cut.

But saving money was apparently only one of the goals for DLA Piper. We can also add DLA to the list of firms that want to end the system of lockstep compensation. The National Law Journal reports:

DLA, the largest firm in the United States, with about 3,785 attorneys worldwide, is one of several firms rethinking its associate program amid the need for cost-cutting brought on by the recession and in light of clients’ demand that they pay only for associates skilled enough to deliver consistent quality. The firm hopes by year end to have a new associate compensation, training and promotion structure that discards the traditional “lockstep” system of paying them based on years of service, the leaders said.

“People really want to rethink the model,” said Lee Miller, one of the firm’s joint chief executives. “I don’t think the model is broken, but people want to rethink what they’re doing and why they’re doing it.”

The model isn’t broken, but the firm is going to change it anyway? That sounds like some excellent Shock Doctrine logic.

After the jump, more details about DLA’s new business model.

Wikipedia defines office politics as a slang term for the often counterproductive human factors present between coworkers in an office environment. Your ability to tolerate and navigate office politics may be an indication of whether or not you need and are ready for a job or career change.

Can you identify with one of the following three office politics tolerance levels?

• Level Three: You love playing and winning the political game. You see the antics of your bosses, peers and subordinates as amusing and know how to benefit from office politics by being aware, strategic and charming.
• Level Two: In the past you were great at the game but your patience for gossip, biased promotions and other trivial matters that are a symptom of office politics is waning. Your desire to play this sport is gone and you get annoyed by wasting time with petty issues while there are more important things to do.
• Level One: You never bought into the game and you can’t even fake it anymore. You have lost respect for people playing the game and you may lose sleep thinking about how office politics is hurting your ability to do your job and your organization’s ability to be effective and productive.

If you identify with level one or two, it may be time for a change, and we can help. If you are curious about what we do, then try our free Career Change Assessment. This assessment is used by our coaches to assess our clients and now it’s available to everyone.

The New World Institute specializes in helping executives who are at a career crossroads revitalize their careers. Call us for a free, no-obligation consultation: 347-445-5763.

Laurel Donnellan is the President and Co-Founder of The New World Institute.
www.thenewworldinstitute.com

[Ed. note: The following piece was authored by The Legal Tease, of Sweet Hot Justice fame. Check out her other musings from Sweet Hot Justice here.]

It’s happened—after a few years and a few thousand billable hours, I’ve finally found him. Sure, there have been loads of false starts along the way, but I think this time it’s for real: I’ve finally met the worst partner in the entire firm. At first, I thought the winner might be Russ, the firm’s resident stone-faced robot and reigning Big Firm Savant. But no. Then, for obvious reasons involving hidden harnesses and coconut-flavored lube, I thought it could possibly be Ian, our favorite slave-driving Pervert, Esq. Wrong again. No, in the past few weeks, the true winner has revealed himself to be a creature far more insidious, more vile: the Cool Partner. And I’m here to warn you—he’s a type more dangerous than you’ve ever imagined.

As any Big Law victim can tell you, the Cool Partner, like any true predator, takes time to attract and distract his prey before he bares his polished little fangs and goes in for the kill. He may seduce you at first with hints of an actual personality, an apparent respect for your time, and possibly even a sense of humor. You’ll marvel at how comfortable you are around him, how energized you feel. You’ll smile and shake your head in disbelief as you sing his praises to fellow associates who ask why you look sunnier than usual. You might even find yourself—even just for one brief, indulgent little moment—wondering if you might’ve been wrong all those times you thought this job was nothing but a festering sewer of misery where dreams go to die at the hands of lunatic, unit-holding nerd sadists. Hell, you might even start waking up happy.

And then reality comes crashing back down.

Witness the carnage first-hand, after the jump.

* New Jersey Internet radio talk show host arrested for blogging that federal judges Frank Easterbrook, Richard Posner, and William Bauer “deserved to be killed” after a recent decision on Chicago handgun ban case. [CNN]

* More Morgan Lewis Musical Chairs: Yesterday, the firm announced that it had tapped gas from Baker Botts. Good thing, because Morgan Lewis lost some energy to Pillsbury this week. [National Law Journal]

* We don’t know how Aaronson, Rappaport, Feinstein and Deutsch does in the courtroom, but it’s a big winner in the New York real estate market. [Observer]

* Nationwide (Law School) Layoff Watch: As predicted in May, layoffs have started at Harvard, despite HLS grads’ protest. [Boston Globe]

* The Fourth Circuit supports the ban on ‘partial birth’ abortions in Virginia. [Washington Post]

The second panel we attended at the recent convention of the American Constitution Society (ACS) focused on a topic near and dear to our heart: free speech on the internet.

The panel, The Internet Revolution and Its Effect on the First Amendment, featured the following participants:

Indiana attorney Larry Wilder was honored with an ATL Lawyer of the Day mention last week thanks to the photo at right. It’s not a stock photo. That’s Wilder on a Wednesday morning, after a raucous night on the town.

That photo going viral has led Wilder to resign his lucrative job with the Jeffersonville City Council. Wilder had been the city’s highest paid attorney — raking in $107,000 from the city or four times that being made by the other five city attorneys — in addition to his private practice work.

From the Courier-Journal:

Larry Wilder, the embattled lawyer for the Jeffersonville City Council, has resigned following the release of photographs of him sleeping in a garbage can after a night of drinking.

“I felt that the best thing for my friends was to eliminate this as on-going angst,” Wilder said.

Wilder may be freeing himself up for a case against the Jeffersonville City Police Department. The photos were taken by one officer and released to the news media by another officer, even though Wilder was never charged. But as one ATL commenter observed last week:

I finally understand why there’s no reasonable expectation of privacy in one’s trash.

Jeffersonville City Council lawyer resigns [Courier-Journal]

Earlier: Lawyer of the Day: Larry Wilder

* If you missed South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford’s press conference, you missed American political theater of the highest order. In case you are interested, here’s what the South Carolina Constitution has to say about impeachment. [The Gaggle]

* This DePaul College of Law situation does not seem to be getting any better. What is the real story behind Provost Epps? Does interim Dean Judge Warren Wolfson have any chance at succeeding? Feel free to share your thoughts and tips. [Brian Leiter’s Law School Reports]

* It appears that the law firms with high profits per partner don’t have lawyers that maintain blogs. Shocking! [Drug and Device Law]

* Tweeting jurors can not be stopped. It’s impossible. The end of the jury trial is near! [Law.com]

* Yesterday, The WSJ Law Blog told us that some conservative students organizations are holding affirmative action bake sales. Obviously, I have some thoughts. Here’s my best attempt to help these people. [True/Slant]

* Should the collar rest inside or outside the blazer? I pop the collar on the shirt and the blazer, because I’m prestigious. [Corporette]

[Ed. note: This post is authored by ATL guest columnist Hope Winters. Hope is an early retired lawyer, turned Senate staffer, turned corporate lobbyist. She lives in Washington, DC. Read her previous work here. Read part I and II.]

There are no structured activities left (other than Karmic Yoga which I will not even respond to here) so we decide to take a hike on the pristine lake the Dining Captain told me about before he attempted to rape me. Olivia whips out the sketchy map we can’t follow, and we end up not on a trail but stuck on path of poison ivy and prickly things and mud. We muddle through streams and rocks; my Chanel sunglasses slip and crash on a rock and break. I remind myself that I hate the Ashram and all its surrounding premises.

But suddenly, as we exit the rocks and the African bush, we really do emerge on flat land facing this huge vast beautiful lake. We just stare at it. It’s sparkling and navy blue and placid. Not a ripple. Not a crescent.

We’re suddenly silent. Peaceful. Grateful. We are Whitman and Thoreau.

We’re getting into it.

But will it last? The adventure ends after the jump.

As we mentioned last night, there is an interesting debate over what White & Case should have done in response to the adulterous sex scandal involving its associate, “Miami White.” The Daily Business Review takes a look at some of the competing theories for crisis management:

For White & Case, the unwanted publicity raises a question all law firm managers and public relations professionals should consider: If an employee’s dirty laundry gets a public airing, how can a law firm respond to minimize the damage?

When asked about the matter, White & Case spokesman William Sancho in Miami offered a brusque “no comment.”

Hours later, an official firm statement came out: “This is a personal matter for the individual involved, and we cannot comment on it.”

It wasn’t really surprising when White & Case declined to respond to the affairs of SexyLexus. But I wonder if Miami White was told by the firm that he couldn’t comment in the press? Cuckolded in Canada said his piece, SexyLexus called in, but multiple phone calls and emails to Miami White have not been returned.

Regardless of the particular plight of Miami White, should White & Case have gone in a different direction? Let’s get into it after the jump.

Sometimes a judge will rule in a way that upsets you. Most lawyers know to keep their cool. But not Pennsylvania criminal defense lawyer Adam Rodgers.

Rodgers was annoyed that Judge Chris Wogan refused to lower his client’s bail or reduce his client’s sentence of prison time (which stemmed, ironically, from contempt charges). So Rodgers threw a tantrum. From the Philadelphia Daily News:

According to observers, the attorney, Adam J. Rodgers, threw a pen and his leather bag, pushed or hurled a chair, and raised a chair over his head, then slammed it down.

Rodgers then stormed out of Common Pleas Judge Chris R. Wogan’s courtroom, repeatedly screaming “Bull——!” and yelling about the perceived injustice.

Luckily, the judge was out of the courtroom when all this transpired, so no contempt charges for Rodgers.

Rodgers was actually right about the “Bull——.” Judge Wogan had his client mixed up with someone else. Post-tantrum, Wogan returned to the bench, lowered the bail from $50,000 to $15,000, and granted Rodgers’s client parole.

Lawyer throws fit in court upon hearing ruling [Philadelphia Daily News]

We’re quite talented at bringing you last week’s news. See, e.g., our ridiculously extensive coverage of the Battle of the Law Firm Bands.

The main reason for our D.C. visit was not the Battle of the Bands, but the national convention of the American Constitution Society (ACS) — the left’s answer to the Federalist Society. With the Democrats in control of both Congress and the White House, this year’s conference was well-attended and celebratory. There was even an upgrade in venue, from the Hyatt Regency to the Mayflower Renaissance.

(Was Eliot Spitzer on the program committee? Or did ACS go with the Mayflower because it’s the traditional venue for the annual conference of the Federalist Society?)

The first plenary panel of this year’s ACS conference featured a star-studded cast:

Usually, Detroit doesn’t make the news unless something terrible is happening there.

Today is no different.

Word out of Crain’s Detroit Business is that the two biggest law firms in the city are laying off lawyers and staff:

Detroit’s two largest local law firms by reported revenue and number of attorneys — Dykema Gossett P.L.L.C. and Miller Canfield Paddock and Stone plc — together confirmed laying off 30 attorneys and 30 staff late Monday; but it was unclear how many were sent packing in Southeast Michigan.

The firms are blaming the layoffs on the economy.

“The firm has provided those who are leaving with severance benefits during this difficult time,” Dykema Chairman and CEO Rex Schlaybaugh Jr. said in a statement. “This reduction is based on the economic climate.”

Does anybody have any positive news to report about the Detroit economy? If so, please share in the comments. Anything positive will do, I’d settle for a story about how a local Detroit retailer is working on a streak of 100 days without having his store windows smashed in.

Dykema cuts, Miller Canfield cuts again [Crain’s Detroit Business]
Dykema; Miller Canfield Layoff 60 [ABA Journal]
File Under ‘Not Too Surprising’: Detroit’s Biggest Firms Cut Lawyers [WSJ Law Blog]

Earlier: Prior ATL coverage of law firm layoffs

It looks like former Yale Law School Dean Harold Koh will in fact be the next Legal Adviser of the State Department. The cloture voted just passed, 65 - 31 according to Congressional sources.

The cloture vote ends months of debate over Koh’s nomination. An up-down vote on his nomination should follow soon.

We’ll see if American foreign policy is immediately transferred to the control of a secret transnational body hell bent on taking our freedoms.

Koh cloture vote passes [The Cable]

Earlier: New York Post Writer Takes A Hatchet to Dean Koh
Yale Law School Conservatives Defend Harold Koh

Ed. note: Have a question for next week? Send it in to advice@abovethelaw.com.

ATL -

For the NY bar, exam takers were given the option of either hand writing the test or typing it on a laptop using ExamSoft. I chose to type it because I can obviously type faster than I can write, but I have been having nightmares about my computer freezing on me or some kind of tech glitch happening during the test. I am really freaking out over here. Should I change over to handwriting?

Katharine Gibbs School for Typing

Dear Katharine Gibbs School for Typing,

When I was your age, there was no such thing as being given “the option” to type the bar exam, unless you were among a select group of Benedict Arnolds who volunteered to participate in the 2005 bar exam laptop test run. Everybody else hand wrote the exam, just like our fathers before us, and their fathers and our father’s father’s fathers and so on and so forth as far back as President Abraham Lincoln, who somehow got away with just “reading” law, most likely because he was a giant and people weren’t about to pick a fight with him over minor things.

The law guild is no different than any other gang: you have to get jumped to get in. Us hand writers wrote until our fingers seized up and our hands gnarled into claws, and by God we liked it that way. My year, some poor soul’s hand fell off altogether so he switched hands and kept right on writing, because that’s just what you do. You typers seem to forget that the first part of the Character and Fitness test is purification by pain.

But you and your Turing machines know nothing of “”honor” or “loyalty” or “code.” Maybe your so-called “laptop” will ease your sissy hand cramps, but it will do nothing to address the fundamental issue here. You, sir, have no respect for your elders or for the handwriting brotherhood. You sicken me.

Will there be problems with your laptop on the day of the exam? Only God knows. And He is watching you and your computer, my friend. And He is judging.

Your friend,

Marin

Back in March, we reported that two big time Skadden D.C. partners were splitting off from the mothership and forming their own firm. Yesterday, we received word that their new firm, BuckleySandler, made a significant new hire:

After 20 years with General Electric, Stephen Ambrose, Jr., former General Counsel of GE Capital’s consumer finance unit, is joining BuckleySandler, as Partner-in-Charge of the firm’s New York office, effective July 1, 2009. This move coincides with the opening of the firm’s New York office.

G.E., we bring good things to life.

A new New York office run by a finance guy? Are they hiring?

Actually, if I was an unemployed corporate attorney in NYC I wouldn’t wait for an answer to that question. Sending a cold, unsolicited resume to a person you haven’t met can’t really hurt. Not in this market.

A spokesperson for Buckley Sandler had this to say about the importance of the hire:

Steve’s reverse commute will provide the firm with not only an accomplished, well-respected addition but an industry insider with a complete understanding of the financial services landscape and huge sector experience. As Steve notes, “Joining BuckleySandler provides me with a superb opportunity to employ as outside counsel the client-focused service and cost management skills I’ve developed during my career, as well as the chance to practice with my longstanding and highly respected legal colleagues at the firm.”

Oh come on, he’s practically begging to be inundated with resumes from young lawyers who also want a complete understanding of the financial services landscape — and a paycheck.

Check out the full BuckleySandler press release after the jump.

* California lawyer Ryan Kent has accused Dahn Yoga of being a cult and filed a class action suit against the Brain Wave Vibrators. [San Francisco Chronicle]

* Ross Mitchell spent just $38,000 on his online law degree and became his own first client. He won his lawsuit to be admitted to the Massachusetts Bar. [Boston Herald]

* Richard Posner is bearish on newspapers and bullish on draconian copyright protection for online news. Permission to link? [The Becker-Posner Blog]

* Is 12 years enough for Bernie? [Am Law Daily]

* Law school is great preparation for doing something other than law. [Legal Intelligencer]

* Musical chairs: Morgan Lewis taps gas from Baker Botts. [Am Law Daily]

Members of WMD and the Bad Ass Brass Band (Latham & Watkins LLP / Law Office of Richard Goldberg), rocking out.

If you're at your computer (and perhaps in the office) at this late hour, you must be very bored.

So check out a slideshow of photos from the sixth annual Battle of the Law Firm Bands, an event previously covered here and here, after the jump.

Kaye Scholer — which conducted stealth layoffs in November and open layoffs in February — is now cutting back on associate pay. The move will only affect associates that are on track to bill below 1600 hours this year, but affect them it will. The WSJ Law Blog reports:

Here’s the way it’ll work: All those first and second year associates who, as of June 1, were on pace to bill fewer than 1600 hours for the year will have 20% of what they stand to make over the last half of the year withheld. (In other words, the firm will hang on to 10% of the year’s salary.) For third year associates who fall beneath the threshold, the firm will withhold 15% of the July-December pay (or 7.5% of the full-year salary).

If, at the end of the year, the associates have hit 1600 hours, they’ll have their full pay restored.

Resting at #70 in the Vault rankings, Kaye Scholer seems to just be continuing the trend of firms in this range trying what they can to save money.

At least the attorneys will have the opportunity to make the money back if they can pick up their hours. It’s more like being sent to your room without dinner, instead of being left by the side of the road.

Kaye Scholer to Withhold Pay From Lower-Billing Associates [WSJ Law Blog]

Earlier: Nationwide Layoff Watch: Kaye Scholer
In This Market: Are You Getting Laid Off or Fired? A Kaye Scholer Case Study

[Ed. note: This post is authored by ATL guest columnist Hope Winters. Hope is an early retired lawyer, turned Senate staffer, turned corporate lobbyist. She lives in Washington, DC. Read her previous work here. Read part I of this piece here.]

After this dinner I’m still starving from, we hop into the car to drive to the purported “private” room we paid extra for. Now I’m really starting to believe murder or rape is a foregone conclusion. I attract criminals like Jewish men attract Asian girls. And here’s the thing, there’s nothing to stop anyone from doing anything. We’re not allowed to lock either our door nor the front door to the Brady Brunchesque house we will be staying in tonight. Our “private” room is in this house. I said a private room. Like hotel room. Not a room in some random family’s house. Not some room I’m not allowed to lock.

As I enter the spacious open living room containing a lot blue mats and a lot small purple chairs for meditation, I find a DVD player. Excellent. Civility. I’ll just do my Denise Austin Yoga for Abs video and skip class tomorrow. It’s almost pitch black in the room because not only do these people not eat, they don’t do electricity.

I walk over to the big glass window peering out over the water — trying to find the lake, and then, I hear this boy’s voice.

“Hey.” I turn around quickly.

Plaid flannel shirt. Black wire rimmed glasses. Scruffy beard. Red North Face jacket. So Ted Bundy.

I have met my maker.

Can Hope survive her first encounter with Ashram men? Non-homicidal details after the jump.

* Some people think that White & Case should have gotten out in front of the SexyLexus story. Regardless of what you think, it’s an interesting case study on Biglaw spin management. [ABA Journal]

* I really hope that a successful business relationship isn’t like a successful marriage. Quite frankly, I don’t know how many roofies one man is allowed to carry around before it gets a little bit weird. [A VC in NYC]

* I’ll take the penis mightier, Trebek. [Courtoons]

* Tax law and the tragedy on the Washington Metro. [Tax Prof Blog]

* I vote we move to a system where the entire jury trial has to be done in segments of 140 characters or less. [What About Clients?]

A while back, Above the Law put out a call for new interns.

We were flooded with applications. Nearly 80 people sent in résumés, writing samples, and funny emails showing they had the stuff to deal with the irreverent world of Above the Law. We saw many qualified candidates, and we want to thank everybody who applied.

We have selected three people to join the fray. They’ve been working behind the scenes for a couple of weeks now. Moderating comments, editing copy, and conducting research projects. We’re now ready to publicly welcome them to the larger ATL community.

After the jump, say hello to Karen, Matt, and Alex. Each one of our new contributors has taken the time to write a brief bio, for your amusement.

The second quarter’s Managing Partner Confidence Index is a good news/bad news situation. The good news is that the managing partners at the nation’s law firms are more confident than they were last quarter. The bad news is that managing partners overall are still expressing “negative” confidence — and that could lead to fresh layoffs in over the next six months. The Wall Street Journal Law Blog reports the good news:

The good news: the overall confidence index was up 23 points to 91. We’re still in “negative” territory, but only slightly. Summarizes Citi’s Mark Costiglio: “Managing partners are much less pessimistic about the broader economy and the legal market, and there’s a sense that the worst is behind them.”

And the bad news:

The not-so-goods: Expenses. MPs continue, it seems, to fret over expenses, especially lawyer compensation. And that, LBers, could lead to a continuation of the parade of horribles: layoffs, hiring-freezes, salary-cuts and the like.

After the jump, the Managing Partner Confidence Index executive summary points out the ugly news.

The members of Dangerous Communication Device (Williams & Connolly), celebrating their victory.

Last night we reported on the Battle of the Law Firm Bands, held last week in Washington, DC. The evening raised over $80,000 for Gifts for the Homeless, a non-profit, all-volunteer organization supported by the city’s legal community to help the homeless.

Eleven bands competed, and one was victorious: Dangerous Communication Device, from Williams & Connolly. They won by raising more money than any other band: over $15,000. (The vote was conducted “Chicago-style,” with each vote requiring a dollar contribution to GFTH.)

Read our interview with the band, after the jump.

A new federal program promises student loan forgiveness for people who qualify after they’ve dutifully paid their debts for ten years. The program will also cap monthly loan payments depending on income. The act, passed in 2007, is set to become effective on July 1st. The National Law Journal reports the awesome news:

Some members of the class of 2009 will have less to complain about, however. A new federal program intended to help borrowers manage their student debt goes into effect on July 1. The legislation — called the College Cost Reduction & Access Act — will cap monthly loan payments according to income and forgive student debt balances after designated periods of time. For attorneys, the main beneficiaries will be those who go on to have long-term public interest careers. But the program will also make loan payments more affordable for all attorneys with high debt loads and relatively low incomes.

“There are a lot of things that are making it tough for new graduates, with the tight job market and the deferrals,” said Heather Jarvis, a senior program manager at Equal Justice Works, an organization that encourages attorneys to undertake public interest law careers. “But there has never been a better time to graduate, as far as student loans.”

Essentially this is the best piece of news for the class of 2009 since they got into law school in the first place. The government will forgive outstanding loans after ten years of payments for people who work in public interest and other qualifying organizations.

Obviously this program is geared towards students who take public interest jobs. Biglaw lawyers are still on their own with their debts:

This option wouldn’t make sense for graduates who take jobs at large firms paying upwards of $100,000, Jarvis said, but it might be right for the sizable segment of law school graduates who don’t earn that kind of money.

“The reality is that most law graduates don’t take those jobs and earn those salaries,” she said. “A lot of people make $60,000 or $70,000 a year. At these salaries, they would qualify for the income-based repayment plan. Debt loads are getting so high that it’s typical for someone to graduate from law school with $100,000 or more in debt. If you were going to stretch out paying your debt anyway, [income-based repayment] is a good option to consider.”

Right now, it appears that many students who can qualify for the program don’t even know it exists. More details after the jump.

Ed. note: Welcome to the latest installment of “Notes from the Breadline,” a column by a laid-off lawyer in New York. Prior columns are collected here. You can reach Roxana St. Thomas by email (at roxanastthomas@gmail.com), follow her on Twitter, or find her on Facebook.

We’ve all heard the statistics about attorney layoffs, unemployment, and the sad state of the economy. But do the hard numbers tell the full story of life in the breadline? Inspired by the Harper’s Index, today I offer you the Notes from the Breadline Index.

More of Roxana by the numbers, after the jump.

Did a number of you LexisNexis users receive this disturbing notice in the mail from LexisNexis?

Seisint (not to be confused with Skynet) is a data-mining company that LexisNexis bought for $775 million, back in 2004. The company created “the Matrix” which gave state and federal governments the ability to analyze records after 9/11.

Back in 2004, LexisNexis was jubilant about the acquisition:

“This is definitely next generation,” said Norm Willox, LexisNexis’s chief officer for privacy, industry and regulatory affairs. “This is the latest and greatest.”

But privacy experts were worried about the technology:

Civil liberties activists warned that the combination of Seisint technology and LexisNexis’s global reach could be massively intrusive if used in the wrong way. “It will hurtle us even faster toward a surveillance society,” said Barry Steinhardt, director of the Technology and Liberty Project at the American Civil Liberties Union. “It can’t be good news here.”

Willox said such fears are overblown because of the care his company takes to ensure that individual privacy is not abused. “LexisNexis has a long history and is well respected for going the extra mile to protect personal privacy,” Willox said. “This or any acquisition is not going to change that.”

Why did LexisNexis wait so long to tell people that its data-mining program had been compromised? More details from the letter after the jump.

You’d be surprised by how often we receive requests for financial advice around here (even though that’s really more the province of Dealbreaker). E.g., should I refinance my law school loans? How much should I be saving for retirement? I’ve just been laid off; what should I do with my 401(k)?

These questions lie beyond our expertise. So we’ve put together a panel of experts to offer insight into current market conditions and what they mean for your personal finances. This free event is taking place on MONDAY, JUNE 29, at 6:30 PM.

The roundtable will be preceded by a sunset cocktail hour, in a room with stunning Central Park views (see above). So come enjoy free drinks with the ATL editors (Lat, Elie, Kash and Marin); pick up some complimentary swag, including Above the Law t-shirts and gavel-shaped stress balls; and then sit down for an informative panel discussion:

MARKET VOLATILITY AND YOUR FINANCES

When: Monday, June 29, 2009, at 6:30 p.m.

Where: 1345 Avenue of the Americas, New York, New York

Speakers:

• Sam Mari, VP, AllianceBernstein
• Bob Stansbury, VP, AXA Equitable
• Deborah O’Neil, J.D., CFPTM, CLU, VP AXA Equitable’s Advanced Markets Team
• David Lat, Above the Law (moderator)

Cost: The event is free and open to the public — feel free to bring friends — but RSVPs are required. Please email rsvp@breakingmedia.com.

The event is less than a week away, and although admission is free, seats are limited. We’ve already received a fair number of responses — so if you think you might be interested in going, please rsvp to save a spot for yourself.

Hope to see you there!

* Florida lawyer Frederick Schaffer smells money in his lawsuit against cold medicine Zicam. Or doesn’t smell it rather, claiming that the medicine made him lose that sense. [Boston Herald]

* Nevada Supreme Court Justice Kris Pickering keeps order in the court, but causes chaos in a UPS parking lot. [Las Vegas Review-Journal]

* It’s a buyer’s market for laterals. [National Law Journal via ABA Journal]

* A guilty plea from Chris Brown. There will be no Rihanna-Brown duets in the near future. Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Patricia Schnegg issued a “two-way” stay-away order. [Associated Press]

* …Courthouse groupies are a testament to the power of music. [Popsquire]

* In a New Yorker profile in May, Jeffrey Toobin argued that John Roberts would politicize SCOTUS. Does last week’s decision regarding no right to DNA evidence for criminals support that argument? [True/Slant]

* Good parting gift for a fashionable Con Law prof? [Highsnobette]

Lining up outside The Black Cat for the Battle of the Law Firm Bands. The evening was sold out — 1,000 tickets in all.

We just got back from Washington, DC, where we spent a few days attending the 2009 convention of the American Constitution Society (ACS). We may have a post or two about the conference later.

While in the nation’s capital, we also attended this fun event: the sixth annual Battle of the Law Firm Bands. A description:

Lawyers from prominent area law firms will compete in a hotly contested sixth annual Battle of the Law Firm Bands to benefit Gifts for the Homeless, Inc. (GFTH), a non-profit, all-volunteer organization supported by the city’s legal community to help the homeless. The Black Cat, a premier hot-spot in DC’s historic U Street district, has partnered with GFTH to host “Banding Together 2009” on Thursday, June 18, from 7:00 pm to midnight.

At the stroke of midnight, one band will be crowned champion for having raised the most money from the crowd through “Chicago-style” voting (each dollar equals one vote - vote early and often!). GFTH will use 100% of the money donated to purchase thermal underwear, sweatshirts, sweatpants, hats, gloves, underwear, socks, blankets and other essential new clothing items for homeless men, women, and children; the clothing is distributed to more than 30 shelters throughout the metro area. GFTH has already raised over $100,000 in connection with Banding Together 2008.

It doesn’t surprise us that Biglaw denizens would be willing to help the homeless. There but for the grace of God….

Our belated account of the evening — The BLT wrote it up in more timely fashion — after the jump.

* The Kindle is a business expense now. Excellent. Now even more people can get their hands on the best thing ever. [Legal Blog Watch]

* Appellate Court Judge Warren D. Wolfson, has been named interim dean at DePaul College of Law. Either Judge Wolfson hasn’t been following along with the fiasco at DePaul, or the man is quite courageous. [Law Librarian Blog]

* For those of you in the Silicon Valley, here’s an event on Wednesday that may be worth your while. [Santa Clara Law]

* Working from home is totally awesome. Unless you live in a closet that you’d hoped to move out of by now, but you can’t thanks to years of poor financial planning and the disappearance of sub-prime mortgages. Then, working from home is just really, really cool. [Young Lawyers Blog]

* Bars are now allowed in Utah. So now we’ve got liquor and the ability to marry multiple women. Vegas should take note, they’re a blackjack table and a dog track away from being a viable vacation alternative. [Transracial]

* Everything you need to know about the Chris Brown preliminary hearing. [Popsquire]

* Explain to me again why Andy Dick is allowed out in public? [Copyranter]

* Was everybody nice to their Dad yesterday? [Securing Innovation via Blawg Review]

Welcome to the future. Like Drinker Biddle did in May, Howrey is changing the nature of the first and second year associate experience. The firm is moving to more of an apprenticeship model. New Howrey associates will receive an emphasis on training and take a significant reduction in salary.

The memo from Howrey explains some of the top-line goals of the new program — called the “Tier 1 Associate Program.”

Participants in Howrey’s Tier 1 Program will spend only one-third of their time during the first year on client billable work to permit them to devote the remainder of their time to pro bono representations and a wide range of training programs, including the firm’s signature professional development experience - the Howrey Academies. In Year One, associates will work with Howrey’s full-time, in-house writing instructor, be assigned to trial teams, and take advantage of other programs offered by Howrey’s award-winning professional development team. They will dedicate approximately one-third of their time to pro bono and public interest matters, which will afford them the opportunity to develop the advocacy skills and in court experience that are central to Howrey’s practice. The emphasis on training will continue into Year Two, with client secondments, judicial externships, and other advanced development opportunities added to the curriculum. Billable hours in the second year will be capped at roughly half of total hours.

That is the good, here is the salary information:

The Tier 1 program will be limited to a select number of associates each year. Compensation during the first two years will be adjusted to reflect the nature of the program and the dramatically reduced billable hours expectations. In addition to an annual salary of $100,000, first year participants will receive $25,000 upon acceptance of their job offer to help defray their law school loans or third year law school expenses. In their second year at the firm, participants will receive an annual salary of $125,000 and a $25,000 bonus upon successful completion of the program and entry into Tier 2 of Howrey’s associate development program. Higher compensation may be offered to candidates with special qualifications, such as advanced technical degrees or clerkships.

At least Howrey is trying. More details and the full memo and a reader poll after the jump.

Don’t you love it when the Supreme Court of the United States makes a concerted effort to avoid constitutional issues? Today, Chief Justice John Roberts got seven other justices together in a truly remarkable display of ignoring an elephant in the room. The WSJ Law Blog reports:

It’s in the waning days of June that the Supreme Court winds up its business for the term, typically with its most high-profile decisions. Today, one such decision was handed down from on high — the case known as Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District v. Holder.

At issue in the case was the constitutionality of section 5 of the 1965 Voting Rights Act, which requires governments in so-called “covered” jurisdictions — state and local governments in areas that once practiced discrimination — to “preclear” changes in election procedures with the Justice Department to ensure that minority voters are protected….

Supreme Court followers and commentators had expected a narrow ruling in the case, with the constitutionality of section 5 possibly turning on the vote of Justice Kennedy. But the Court threw everyone a curve-ball, ruling 8-1 in an opinion written by Chief Justice Roberts that drew a narrower path — keeping Section 5 in place, but allowing the “covered” jurisdiction at issue — a utility district in Austin, Texas — to apply for exemption from the law.

After the jump, SCOTUSblog tells us that by avoiding the constitutional issue, the Court has put Congress on notice that it needs to get off of its ass if it expects section 5 to survive much longer.

The state of Minnesota is providing more evidence that law schools are completely out of whack with the current market realities. The state is doing what it can to keep undergraduate tuition low, at the expense of law students who will be drowning in so much debt they’ll need to grow gills.

The Minneapolis Star-Tribune reports the most recent tuition proposal coming out of Minnesota:

Undergraduates catch a break in the next University of Minnesota budget that would keep their tuition increases low despite a cut in state funding.

Graduate and professional students won’t have the same luck.

The students who make up about 40 percent of the student body are the hidden victims of a bad-news budget that the Board of Regents is expected to vote on Wednesday.

By “graduate and professional students” the paper really means to say law students. The proposed tuition hike is larger for future (unemployed) lawyers than other graduate students:

While in-state undergraduate students will face 3.1 percent tuition hikes, most grad students could see a 7.5 percent increase in their bills this year. First-year medical students’ in-state rate may rise 5.2 percent, to $32,328. Newbie Minnesotan law students could pay 15.3 percent more than their counterparts did last year.

Are Minnesota state officials even nominally aware of what is going on in the legal market in their own state? Could somebody point the Board of Regents to www.abovethelaw.com after the jump?

Here’s an interesting rumor we’ve heard. We’re a little short on details, and we’re trying to chase down additional confirmation. We thought we’d toss it out as a blind item and solicit the missing information from you, our readers.

This is what we’re hearing. One large law firm is so hard up for work that it is starting to give some summer associates what we’d call “fake work.”

To be sure, much of the work given to summer associates, in any economy, is make-work — e.g., write a memo to file on a legal issue that will never actually arise in the litigation. But this isn’t mere make-work; it’s fake-work. Summers are being given assignments for projects that have already been completed. For example, summers are being asked to draft research memos for briefs that have already been filed. And, interestingly enough, multiple summer associates — but located in different offices of the firm, to reduce the likelihood of their comparing notes — are being given the same fake-work assignment.

What are the advantages of this approach? After the jump.

Many summers can already see the writing on the wall. It’s going to be a no-offer party this fall. Law school career service professionals are trying to prepare their students for the inevitable.

The career services offices at Georgetown University Law Center sent around a very thoughtful letter, on Friday. Summer associates should take heed. Let’s get the obvious news out of the way first:

What are we hearing?

I have been speaking with many of our close contacts in law firms across the country to assess what firms are planning in terms of post-graduate offers to their summer associates. Most firms indicate that they are waiting until the latest possible date to finalize their strategy so as to take into account as much market information as possible, but a few themes are emerging:

1. Unlike past years, many firms will not be making offers to all or almost all their summers. I hear of offer rates that range from 80% at the high end to 50% at the low end. Note that there is significant variation from firm to firm and region to region, and all the firms I speak with are trying their best to make offers to as many of their summer associates as possible.

2. Many firms are considering making deferred offers to some or all of their current summer associates to begin work sometime in 2011, and some have already announced that they will do so. Firms are not clear as to what stipend, if any, they will pay deferred associates in the coming year, and what conditions (e.g. working in the public sector) must be met to receive a stipend.

The class of 2009 thought that they were the “lost generation.” But would they want to switch places with the class of 2010?

After the jump, more bad news from GULC career services.

We told you so — over a week ago. This past weekend, at the ACS National Convention, we received further confirmation from Yale Law School sources. So today’s announcement of Professor Robert Post as the new dean of YLS comes as no surprise.

The official announcement from Yale president Richard Levin, plus one student’s take on the Post pick, after the jump.

Last week, the Massachusetts Trial Court got approval for a unique solution to address its budget shortfall, reported Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly:

The Supreme Judicial Court’s Committee on Judicial Ethics has approved a proposal by Chief Justice for Administration and Management Robert A. Mulligan that would allow deferred law-firm associates to work for the Trial Court as “volunteer interns” while on the payroll of the firms that hired them.

Great for the court — it doesn’t have to pay for clerks. Great for deferred associates — they get valuable experience during their deferral year. Great for BigLaw — their incoming associates get clerkship experience. Everyone’s happy, right?

Well, not the 24 clerks who had been slotted to get those positions whose offers have been withdrawn. And not those troubled by the ethics of corporate-sponsored clerks in the courtroom. Though approving the arrangement, the Committee on Judicial Ethics admitted that there’s something a bit troubling about it:

The CJE acknowledged that allowing law firms to pay the salaries of clerks implicates portions of the Judicial Code of Conduct that require judges to avoid impropriety and appear unbiased. It also stated that the plan raises the issue of whether the volunteer interns are a “gift” or “favor” to the judges of the Trial Court from the law firms.

The CJE had a solution for that. Keep it all secret!

“Structuring the program in such a way that the law firms’ involvement is unknown not only to the public but also to the judges who will be ‘employing’ the volunteer interns will negate any impression that those law firms are in a special position to influence the judge,” the CJE panel wrote.

Members of the public might not be aware of the connection when they have a case before the court, but the general news-consuming public of Massachusetts knows about the plan now. It’s in the Boston Globe and is currently the newspaper’s number four most e-mailed story.

What do you think about the ethical hullabaloo? Vote in our poll, after the jump.

[Ed. note: This post is authored by Evan Jowers and Robert Kinney of Kinney Recruiting, sponsor of the Asia Chronicles. Kinney has made more placements of U.S. associates and partners in Asia than any other firm in the past two years. You can reach them by email: asia at kinneyrecruiting dot com.]

Evan here. Apologies for the delay in getting this post up. I just returned Tuesday from a few weeks of hectic work travel - Hong Kong, Tokyo, New York - and have been slammed the first couple of days back in the office. It was the typical non-stop meetings for 16 days (with both candidates and firms), plus I also made a few associate placements in HK (two M&A and one cap markets) earlier this month.

We are representing a large number of both US associate and partner candidates in Asia now, especially in HK / China, and our entire team is being kept quite busy. Robert and I traveled to Hong Kong the past couple of weeks mainly in order to help some of our partner candidates pitch their skill set and books to their target firms, as well as help firms attract key partner additions they need.

I plan to return to HK / China later this summer for a longer six week trip, as well, after a short Dubai trip. Of course, Alexis is based in HK. Yuliya is in Russia all summer working in that market (things are starting to pick up deal flow wise in Russia, but it will be a while before firms there start hiring again).

We have a few urgent associate openings right now in HK / China (many more slower moving openings, but these are the most urgent):

1) 5 to 10 years cap markets US associate / counsel, fluent Mandarin, Hong Kong
2) 7+ years energy / project finance US associate / counsel, fluent Mandarin, Hong Kong / China
3) 4 to 7 years PE / M&A associate, Mandarin preferred, Hong Kong
4) 7+ years IP / TMT (litigation and transactional experience needed) associate / counsel / junior partner, Mandarin fluent, Hong Kong

***More after the jump.

[Ed. note: Above the Law has teamed up with Law Shucks. Law Shucks has done excellent work translating all of the layoff news into user-friendly charts and graphs: the Layoff Tracker.]

Let’s all move to Nebraska! In a week in which unemployment was up in 48 out of 50 states (plus DC), Nebraska’s unemployment dropped by 0.1%, keeping it tied with North Dakota for the lowest in the nation at 4.4% (tie goes to the state with the Championship Subdivision (formerly D-I) football program).

At the other end of the spectrum, the state with the finest football program in the nation has the highest unemployment rate: Michigan at 14.1% (Go Blue!).

Closer to home, New York’s unemployment has hit 9%, the highest rate in more than a decade due to continuing deep cuts in the financial-services industry that spins off so much legal work.

After the jump, we detail the effects that has had on law firms this week.

* One bra size does not fit all. There are so many different reasons why one might get a severe rash from a Victoria’s Secret bra that the 17 suits filed in various states cannot be consolidated into one. [On Point News]

* More on Law Student of the Day: Leo Wolpert. The UVA Law card shark is spending his summer writing memos for the ACLU. Money quote from the article: “With the economy as it is, it’s definitely nice to have poker to fall back on.” [Washington Post]

* A North Carolina company had a big day in court last week. On Thursday, MIG Inc. filed for bankruptcy and filed a big lawsuit against Paul Weiss. MIG alleges that stock offering documents drafted by the firm were unprofessional and filled with errors that cost it $140 million when it merged with another company in 2007. [American Lawyer]

* Rihanna may sing from the witness stand today in Chris Brown’s assault trial. [CNN]

* Federal Judge Denny Chin of the Southern District of New York has a flair for the dramatic. [Studio 360]

We know how much everybody loves rankings. By now, everybody has had time to digest the new law school pecking order — even George Washington Law School students.

But true prestige whoring begins much earlier than law school. U.S. News has just released (hat tip: Tax Prof Blog) a list of the top 400 colleges and universities in the world.

I’m not sure how useful these rankings are, to anybody, anywhere, ever. But I’m sure they will make some people feel good about themselves — and other people mercilessly attack the schools that are more highly ranked than their alma maters.

Of course, U.S. News just did this eight months ago. We posted about it and everything. How many different ways can this magazine come up with to slobber all over Harvard and Yale?

In any event, this time U.S. News is ranking the top 400 universities, instead of the top 200.

After the jump, take a look at the top 10.

Our Lawyer of the Day is appropriately named. From the sound of this story, this Indiana lawyer could probably hold down the name Larry Wildest.

The photo to the right is not a stock photo. That’s Wilder on Wednesday morning after a raucous night on the town. From the Courier-Journal:

Conrad Embry, 80, the neighbor who called police, saw his garbage can on its side and someone lying in it when he took is dog out for a walk about 7 a.m.

“If I’d known it was Larry Wilder, I wouldn’t have called the police,” Embry said. He said Wilder “has been a wonderful neighbor.”

In an interview Thursday, Wilder acknowledged he went out Tuesday night with a group of friends to celebrate after one of them passed a real-estate licensing exam, and that he had been drinking.

Passing a test is good, but going into real estate these days is a bit challenging. No wonder they got smashed. So how did Wilder get home and end up in the trash can?

* Tyra Banks’s stalker is going to have to take an “anti-stalking” course. I didn’t know they had to teach masturbation nowadays. [Popsquire]

* Going from Biglaw to small law can be tough, especially when you don’t actually know how to do anything. [Litination]

* Could somebody who works at a law firm please flip out over an email greeting like this? It’d be great if it was a managing partner, but I’d settle for a secretary who doesn’t like nicknames to this level. [Politico]

* I’ve never heard of a better way of expressing just how much “one trillion” really is. The economy is so, totally, screwed. [NPR]

* An early Blawg Review to celebrate Father’s Day. [Securing Innovation via Blawg Review]

* Don’t forget, Monday June 29th Lat will be moderating a panel discussion about surviving today’s market. Free Drinks + David Lat = Money. [Above the Law]

Earlier this week, we reported that salary cuts have spread to the Pacific Northwest. Now it appears that the salary cutting craze has migrated to the Southwest. Surely, our territories in Guam will be next.

The Phoenix based firm Snell & Wilmer has cut associate salaries by 10%. Above the Law received this statement from the firm:

We held meetings with our associates in each of our offices on Tuesday, June 16, announced the following, and answered associates’ questions:

* Associates’ salaries will be reduced 10% across the board, effective with associates’ July 15, 2009, paychecks; and

* Snell & Wilmer will be paying performance-based bonuses later this year.

It is worth noting that Snell & Wilmer did not freeze associate salaries at 2008, as many other firms have done. So while the cut takes a bite out of the 2009 pay raise, it’s not the double hit some associates are experiencing.

I hear land is still pretty cheap out in the Mojave. Water? That’s a different story.

Earlier: Nationwide Salary Cut Watch: Firms in the Pacific Northwest Also Feel Gloomy
Prior ATL coverage of salary cuts

We’ll bottom-line this week’s contest, folks: The SCOTUS clerk wins. Yep, after a long absence, LEWW’s favorite credential makes a welcome appearance in the NYT weddings section, and we’ve got the details for you.

But first, congratulations to Sabrina Charles and Jamie Dycus, who readers overwhelmingly voted Legal Eagle Couple of the Month for May, demonstrating that — in the words of one commenter (and apparently, in the minds of ATL readers) — “Wachtell > Sotomayor > Olympic medal.”

Here are our finalists:

1. Kathryn Whitfield and Adam Fotiades

2. Christina Krause and Peter Henderson

3. Pamela Bookman and Jeffrey Perlman

More about these couples, after the jump.

The dean of the DePaul University College of Law, Glen Weissenberger, has been removed. But this doesn’t sound like your ordinary law school administration shuffle. Dean Weissenberger alleged that there was a significant mistake in the documents DePaul sumbitted to the ABA for its accreditation review, and now he is gone.

The university provost told the faculty and staff yesterday:

Dear College of Law Faculty and Staff,

I write today to inform you that there will be a change in leadership at the College of Law effective immediately. At my recommendation, the president and I have removed Glen Weissenberger as dean and hired a new interim dean who will be announced soon.

I can assure you that this decision, which is being made in the best interests of our students and the College of Law, was made only after long and careful thought and consideration. I respect all you have accomplished under Glen’s leadership. However, the working relationship between the dean and the administration had deteriorated to the point where it had become difficult to accomplish the college’s work, hence my recommendation to the president for this action.

Our faculty and staff are the lifeblood of the College of Law, and I recognize that you have a right to be informed about why I made this difficult decision. I invite all faculty and staff to attend a private meeting at [Redacted] where I will answer questions to the best of my ability, recognizing that this is, in part, a personnel matter and I will not be able to answer all inquiries.

We have selected a highly qualified and respected member of the legal community to serve as interim dean, ensure a smooth transition and continue the momentum you have given to the college. I look forward to making an announcement about the candidate in the very near future.

Sincerely,

Helmut Epp
Provost

We reached out to Dean Weissenberger and his response suggested that this situation is far beyond a mere administrative disagreement.

Details after the jump. And an update.

As we mentioned this morning, K.A.D. (Kiwi) Camara was on the wrong side of the news cycle yesterday.

A federal jury ruled that his client, Jammie Thomas-Rasset, violated copyrights on 24 songs she downloaded, and hit her with a whopping $1.92 million judgment — which works out to $80,000 per downloaded song.

Camara has achieved notoriety for being the youngest person to graduate from Harvard Law School, and for miscalculating how people would react to the abbreviation “nig” when used as a synonym for African-Americans.

Jammie Thomas-Rasset retained Camara’s law firm, Camara & Sibley, for her second jury trial against the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA).

When we spoke to Camara last month, he explained why Thomas-Rasset made a wise choice:

“We’re generalists who handle the most complex, unique, one-off matters,” explained Camara. “If you take a complex matter to a big firm, you’ll be routed to twenty different hyperspecialists. You’ll end up settling for partial advice — ‘Do this, but we haven’t considered this aspect’ — or you’ll end up paying huge fees, because you’re getting specialized advice from twenty different people who don’t work well as a team.”

Camara & Sibley’s model is different, according to Kiwi: “The idea here is that you get generalists who learn the intricacies of your one-off, unique case. You don’t want a hyperspecialist. You just want a good lawyer.”

But the second trial went even more poorly for Thomas-Rasset than the first one.

Kiwi responds after the jump.

Starting your own law firm: it isn’t for everyone. Some of you may recall that Roxana, of Notes from the Breadline, viewed herself as ill-suited to solo practice.

But many other lawyers do want to strike out on their own. And some attorneys, faced with the difficult legal job market, decide that they have no choice but to hang up a shingle.

The final panel of Tuesday’s conference, Getting Back in the Game: How to Restart Your Career in a Down Economy, was devoted to the subject of how to start and grow your own law firm. Four successful solo or small-firm lawyers told their stories and offered advice.

Read about the discussion — covering such nuts-and-bolts topics as office space, malpractice insurance, and how much it might cost to set up your own firm — after the jump.

Perhaps Breaking Back Into Big Law is going to get a little easier, now that some of the AmLaw 100 are starting to hire lateral associates again. The Job of the Week is one of several new openings, primarily in litigation and intellectual property, that you can find out about over at Lateral Link. Also, just a reminder: if your firm is offering a paid deferral, please contact your Lateral Link search consultant, since Lateral Link has dozens of in-house positions for deferred attorneys. Lateral Link members click here for more details.

Position: Junior Litigation Associate

Location: New York, NY

Description: An AmLaw 100 law firm is seeking a junior commercial litigation associate. The attorney must have outstanding academic credentials and previous major law firm experience.

For more information on this position or to apply, please see Position #10580 on Lateral Link. Membership in Lateral Link is free and you can apply at www.laterallink.com.

A Texas judge has been indicted for keying his neighbor’s Range Rover. The Houston Chronicle reports the possible penalties for criminal mischief in Texas:

Woody Ray Densen, 69, could face 180 days to two years in a state jail and a fine of up to $10,000 if convicted. He could also be disciplined by the state Commission on Judicial Conduct.

That’s all you get for keying another man’s truck in Texas? I thought that was a capital offense down there.

Judge Densen’s alleged vandalism was caught on tape. It was worth him doing it, just to catch him doing it:

Adam Kliebert, a 40-year-old home builder, set up a surveillance camera in his Rice Village-area driveway that recorded a man he identified as Densen walking behind his 2006 Range Rover and appearing to pause and tamper with it on May 23. Kliebert has said he was frustrated that someone kept damaging his SUV, leaving him with repair bills for $3,000.

After the jump, let’s check out the video.

* Don’t cheap your Dad on Father’s Day. [Bloomberg]

* Allen Stanford has been arrested and indicted. [Los Angeles Times]

* The RIAA won big in its file sharing suit. Very big. [Minneapolis Star-Tribune via WSJ Law Blog]

* Never ask questions you don’t already know the answer to. Especially on T.V. Especially when a million dollars is involved. [Courthouse News Service]

* A city in Montana wants to know your Facebook status passwords before you can get a job. Anybody got a problem with that? [ABA Journal]

* Partner hiring spree for Greenberg Traurig. [Am Law Daily]

* Summer + Recession = Murder? [New York Times]

The other night, a commenter with insomnia wrote:

Is there someone living in Flint, Michigan who will exchange their $18,000 house for my worthless JD? I will even take over the payments from your inflated mortgage. My piece of paper does not even provide shelter for my skinny ass. In exchange you could be a practicing attorney doing work that a trained chimpanzee could perform.

As Biglaw continues its painful unwinding, and as even contract attorney work becomes hard to obtain, holders of J.D. degrees have been asking: What else can I do with my legal education? Hence our occasional series on career alternatives for attorneys.

This was the subject of a panel discussion entitled Exploring the Range of Options With Your JD. It was the third panel at Tuesday’s conference, co-sponsored by the New York City Bar and Vault, on Getting Back in the Game: How to Restart Your Career in a Down Economy.

Read about the panelists and their perspectives, after the jump.

Earlier this week, we reported on staff layoffs at Paul Hastings. Since Lehman collapsed, Paul Hastings has been through few rounds of attorney layoffs as well.

But Paul Hastings partners haven’t exactly been sitting back and counting cash. Especially younger partners. Above the Law has been able to confirm that a number of partners have been de-equitized since the beginning of the global financial crisis.

Our sources didn’t have overall numbers. But, one tipster put it like this:

You should cover what is going on at Paul Hastings … don’t forget that things are sh**** for jr. partners too.

No doubt.

But according to Paul Hastings spokespeople, the only thing happening at Paul Hastings is “business as usual.”

More details after the jump.

* Lat and Kash put on their black turtlenecks and went to the theater. They’ve written a review for Monetizing Emma. [Dealbreaker]

* What’s more scary than law firms outsourcing legal work offshore? How about clients going directly to Indian law firms, obviating the U.S. and U.K. altogether? [Legally India]

* Can fashion knock off litigation save the jobs of fashion lawyers? [Miss Trials]

* Doesn’t the phrase “patent damages” refer to General Patton? Did I just reference a guy who died 64 years ago just to make a pun? Maybe I should let the professional speak about the cutting edge of patent reform. [Intellectual Property Colloquium]

* Should we be covering smaller law firms? I don’t know, how are things going a Binder & Binder these days? [Law and More]

It looks like there may have been a mini-riot at the Bar/Bri lecture today. Apparently some students felt that the Con Law lecturer wasn’t entirely on top of all the salient issues. We heard from a few of them; here is one report:

I’m one of thousands of BarBri students studying for the New York Bar. I attend one of the Video locations. Today’s lecture was Constitutional Law. The lecturer was Professor Cristina Rodriguez from NYU. She was horrendous. Not only as a speaker/lecturer, but … she also got some points of law wrong on the handout. Barbri had re-recorded the lecture, which is available later today. At my location, students left midway through the lecture. I don’t plan on going to the lecture tomorrow.

Of all the con law profs, how did Barbri end up with one of the worst? Is that all I get with my thousands of tuition dollars?

After the jump, an email that BarBri sent to its students about the Con Law lecture.

UPDATE: Please note that this post has been revised in various respects since it was originally published. In addition, please see the addendum, after the jump.

Ed. note: Have a question for next week? Send it in to advice@abovethelaw.com.

Dear Above The Law,

I am a summer associate at a BigLaw firm in New York. I have no work and I spend my day surfing the net. My assignment coordinator forbade me from getting work from anyone else, but won’t give me any either. The partners and associates ignore me. I feel like they’re creating an impossible situation where they’re setting me up to be no-offered. What should I do?

Who Framed Roger Rabbit

Dear Who Framed Roger Rabbit,

If you’ve seen Intervention, Celebrity Rehab with Dr. Drew seasons 1-3 or Sober House, you’re no doubt familiar with the Serenity Prayer:

God grant me the serenity:
To accept the things I cannot change;
Courage to change the things I can;
And wisdom to know the difference.

Here’s some wisdom: your quandary is of the “things I cannot change” type. If you’re not getting any work and everyone’s avoiding you it’s either because you smell or they didn’t want the ATL press associated with rescinding your summer offer and now they’re just humoring you for 10 weeks. Assuming that they are humoring you, your no-offer destiny is written in the stars and it doesn’t make sense for you to fret about it and beg for work. Puritanism died out because people eventually realized that there was no point in being righteous if their fate was predestined. God The firm has predestined you to find a job elsewhere, so grab a scarlet letter and party like it’s 1647. You also might want to look into the smell thing just in case because it’s good to be able to cross things like that off the list.

Your situation is pretty ideal, because now that you know that you’ll be no-offered you can kick back and enjoy the rest of summer without the nagging uncertainty. Take your $2,500 a week and buy a Margaritaville DM1000 Frozen Concoction Maker and sip daquiris from a Nalgene bottle at your desk. Go on a Sex and the City tour and crap your pants when you get to Magnolia Bakery. Walk into a Starbucks at 2 pm and demand to know, “Don’t you people have jobs?” Whatever you do, don’t waste your time worrying about an offer that is never going to happen.

Serenity Now.

Your friend,

Marin

At the beginning of 2009, we were tracking salary freezes as law firms across the country froze their salaries at 2008 levels, rather than instituting lockstep raises based on seniority. Our most recent salary freeze round-up was in February. (We also acknowledged those that had raises as normal.)

Since then though, the salary freeze watch has been replaced by the salary cut watch. Rather than keeping salaries at 2008 levels, some firms are cutting back to 1998 levels.

Okay, not really. Salaries aren’t quite in line with the days of Ally McBeal, but some pay stubs are starting to resemble those of 2005.

So what about those firms that instituted “slurpee freezes” back in January? These firms said they were keeping salaries at 2008 levels, but that they planned to revisit the decision later in the year. It was assumed at the time that they would be revisiting in order to raise salaries, but that has not been the case.

If your firm hasn’t “revisited” the decision, that might be a good thing. None of those with slurpee freezes decided to raise salaries, though quite a few cut them. Specifics after the jump.

Some people compare Biglaw to high school, but there wasn’t a lot of statistical evidence that proved popularity in high school. Thankfully, the Career Center can provide some hard data on the most popular firms in Biglaw.

In the month and a half since its launch, the Firm Snapshots on the Career Center have been viewed almost 100,000 times. We are constantly updating these snapshots with new information (some good news, some bad news), and in the last week we have updated the profiles for each of the following firms:

Gibson Dunn
Skadden
Venable
Cravath
Pillsbury
Bryan Cave
Shearman

Thanks to all of you who have sent in tips. Feel free to send additional updates to careercenter@abovethelaw.com.

We also encourage you to share information about your firm by signing up and taking our four-question survey.

So now, on to the good stuff — which firms have been most popular recently? We’ve complied the list of the 20 most visited firm snapshots in the month of June.

Check it out, after the jump.

Today, the Supreme Court ruled that convicted criminals do not have a constitutional right to possibly exculpatory DNA evidence. The Court decided District Attorney’s Office v. Osborne by a 5 - 4 margin. SCOTUSblog reports Chief Justice John Roberts’s majority opinion:

The task of writing rules to control access to DNA evidence “belongs primarily” to the legislature, the Chief Justice wrote. Pursuing a “freestanding and far-reaching constitutional right of access” to DNA evidence through a civil rights lawsuit, Roberts wrote, would “short-circuit” efforts now being made by the federal government and many states to develop tools on access to such evidence. “There is no reason to constitutionalize” access through the courts when elected officials are making “a prompt and considered” response to the DNA phenomenon, the opinion concluded.

Anthony Zuiker is going to be pissed off. CSI: Rikers Island is going to have to go back to the drawing board.

The dissent after the jump.

Ed. note: Welcome to the latest installment of “Notes from the Breadline,” a column by a laid-off lawyer in New York. Prior columns are collected here. You can reach Roxana St. Thomas by email (at roxanastthomas@gmail.com), follow her on Twitter, or find her on Facebook.

After my 30 Rock-induced crying jag, sleep settles over me for a few precious hours. But in the middle of the night, I wake up suddenly, feeling deeply disoriented. It takes me a moment to realize that I am at T.J.’s, in his roommate’s bed, and when I do I am convinced that it is early December. I sit up, tangled in a cobweb of confusion and fighting the vaguely panicky sense that I have to do my Christmas shopping. After looking out the window, I spend a few baffled seconds wondering what happened to the blanket of snow I expected to see covering the ground.

As the fog of sleep clears, I piece together the evening and realize why I am so confused. The last time I stayed at T.J.’s was before Christmas, the weekend of a huge snowstorm. I remember waking up to find everything buried under cottony snow, the streets silent and empty. T.J. and I bundled up and, charmed by the novelty of playing mountaineer, trekked to the deli on our skis. When I close my eyes, it is December again, and I am immersed in the feeling of suspended reality, the simple pleasure of finding a familiar landscape transformed, and the childish delight of a snowy day. That was probably the last time I felt so carefree, I think sadly. That was before I lost my job.

I lie in bed, trying to hold on to the memory. Eventually, I doze off, dreaming that it is December, and that I will wake up to another snow day and the momentary relief from responsibility granted by awesome meteorological events. I will have no choice but to make snowballs and throw them at T.J., stopping only to eat dessert. Then I will go to work and bill lots of hours, and the managing partner will call me into his office to tell me to stop working so hard. “Roxana,” he says in my half-dream, “when do you have time to sleep? Listen: things are a little lean right now, but we think a ginormous bonus is in order.”

Unfortunately, reality intrudes on my dream. Perhaps even more unfortunately, reality seems to be adapted from of an episode of the old TV show “Land of the Lost,” in which the daughter, Holly, encounters her future self while trying to save her family from fearsome lizard people. But, while Holly’s future self comforts her, giving her enough courage to face the task ahead, future Roxana is decidedly cranky and unsupportive. She calls December Roxana (who is frolicking in the snow) inside, and then serves her a steaming bowl of acrid soup, which (I determine later) is an uninspired dream metaphor for disappointment. “Get used to it, Rox,” she says. “There’s more where that came from. And, by the way: you might want to scrap the snowman-building and focus on learning to make your own clothes.” The dream dissipates. I wanted to sleep until things got better, I think irritably. Why does future Roxie have to be such a downer?

More after the jump.

“Life is either a daring adventure or nothing” is a favorite quote of mine from Helen Keller, and it also explains why so many of us have a fascination with characters like James Bond. I have a theory that the reason so many of us love James Bond and other adventure movies is because our own lives and careers lack excitement.

007 clearly loves what he does, and he continues to take risks everyday to continue the work and life he is passionate about. Ok—so it’s just a movie—but wouldn’t it be fun if your career was a little more exciting and you were equally as driven and passionate about your work?

At the New World Institute we take people on a self-exploration adventure and help them find their true calling and purpose and turn it into a living. Here is how we do it:

• Match you to a highly qualified, accredited TNWI-trained coach who specialized in career realignment and transformation.
• Provide you with tools including an assessment, a workbook, a customized curriculum and post-program analysis to assess your career both past and present and give you clarity around the areas where you need most help.
• Support you in creating a comprehensive transition strategy that will give you specific plan for creating more happiness, career satisfaction and health.

If you are curious about what we do, then try our brand new Career Change Assessment. This assessment is used by our coaches to assess our clients and now it’s available to everyone.

The New World Institute specializes in helping executives who are at a career crossroads revitalize their careers. Call us for a free, no-obligation consultation: 347-445-5763.

Laurel Donnellan is the President and Co-Founder of The New World Institute.
www.thenewworldinstitute.com

This isn’t going to come as a galloping shock to most people, but it turns out that the firms that are making the most profit aren’t feeling the need to defer their incoming first year associates. Am Law Daily reports:

The only top ten firm that is making deferrals mandatory this year is Schulte, Roth & Zabel, which is requiring all new associates to start in 2010.

But the rest of the top ten most profitable partnerships are taking a different path. Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen and Katz; Quinn Emanuel Urquhart Oliver & Hedges; Boies, Schiller & Flexner; Sullivan & Cromwell; Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison; Kirkland & Ellis; and Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton are starting all of their associates next fall as originally scheduled.

Congratulations to the incoming first years lucky enough to be heading one of these firms in the fall.

But it’s time to learn an important lesson about the difference between “revenue” and “profit.”

More after the jump.

* Justice may be blind, but she needs to see your face in Michigan. [True/Slant]

* Lawyers for Allen Stanford, the Texas financier accused of a massive swindle, want Baker Botts off the case. [Reuters]

* Convicted terrorist Jose Padilla can sue John Yoo for the legal memos he wrote at the Justice Department defending torture. [San Francisco Chronicle]

* Renowned legal scholar Lawrence Lessig stars in a new film. Stanford Law is getting the publicity shout-out in the articles about the documentary, but Harvard recently snatched Lessig for its faculty. [DCist]

* Chapter 11 bankruptcy. So hot right now. [Wall Street Journal]

* Is this year’s cutthroat BigLaw environment worse for summer associates or for the hiring partners they are stalking? [Fulton County Daily Report]

* Does Obama have big plans for Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan? [Chicago Sun-Times]

Biglaw is suffering — big time. Meanwhile, many smaller and midsize law firms are doing just fine, even thriving. (A number of them — e.g., Silver Golub & Teitell, McKool Smith, and Stone & Magnanini — are expanding, with the help of job postings on Above the Law.)

These days, Am Law 200 firms are generally doing better than their Am Law 100 counterparts. This generally hasn’t been the case, at least in recent years. Industry observers are wondering: Is small beautiful?

That was one theme of Casting a Wider Net: The Rise of the Small to Mid-Sized Law Firm, another panel at yesterday’s conference, co-sponsored by the New York City Bar and Vault, entitled Getting Back in the Game: How to Restart Your Career in a Down Economy. (We wrote about an earlier panel here.)

The panel on small to midsize law firms consisted of:

ALLA ROYTBERG (moderator), Solo Practitioner, and Director, City Bar Small Law Firm Center;

PAUL LIPPE, CEO, Legal On-Ramp;

CORIN LINDSLEY, Managing Director, Major Lindsey & Africa; and

RON GEFFNER, partner, Sadis & Goldberg.

The discussion covered such topics as how to learn about high-quality small firms, how to apply to them, and how to grow one, once you’re there.

A short discussion, after the jump.

We usually wouldn’t recommend that law school students try to pay their tuition through gambling — but if you’re a former poker pro, it might not be such a bad idea.

Leo Wolpert, a rising 2L at the University of Virginia, just won “Event 29,” a $10,000 no-limit hold ‘em heads-up tournament in the World Series of Poker. From the Poker Pages:

Wolpert is a 26-year-old former professional poker player who is currently attending law school. He is enrolled at the University of Virginia. He just completed his first year. He graduated with an undergraduate degree from the University of Michigan. He spent two years as a poker pro, mostly playing online. Wolpert was so successful that he built up a huge bankroll playing mostly cash games. He decided to use his poker winnings to go back to school.

His total winnings in Event 29: $652,682 $625,682. With that in the bank and a law degree from UVA, we see a bright future in the cards for Wolpert.

Former pro Leo Wolpert wins Event 29 [ESPN]
World Series of Poker Leo Wolpert Wins Event 29 $10K HeadsUp [PokerPages News]

* More evidence that Venable is the weirdest and/or coolest law firm in DC. [On the Record]

* Is Harvard Law School just too…. nice? [The Stimulist]

* Should veils be allowed on the witness stand? [Volokh Conspiracy]

* Yesterday, we reported on a Saudi law firm that went a little too far in its efforts to enact affirmative action for white people. But maybe their wallet was in the right place. [True/Slant]

* What’s the best way of measuring the progress of women in large law firms? [Lexis Hub / Building A Better Legal Profession]

* Obama can run from the gay marriage issue, but he can’t hide. In fact, it doesn’t look like he is going to be very effective trying to run away either. [Law Dork 2.0]

* There is no good argument against secession for Long Island. [The Daily Show]

* Summer associates: check out this useful resource, the Summer Associate Survival Guide, courtesy of your friends at PLC. [Practical Law Company]

If you have ever been on financial aid, you know that many law schools require you to work over the summer and make financial contributions towards your debts based on your summer employment. Harvard Law School has such a requirement. Financial aid awards have been traditionally determined based on a ten-week, minimum summer work requirement.

That’s a fine policy during normal economic times, but these are anything but normal economic times. Many students — even Ivy-encrusted Harvard Law students — have seen firms reduce the length of their summer programs to less than ten weeks.

Earlier this month, it looked like HLS students in this situation would not only be losing income because their firms scaled back their summer programs, but they would also owe Harvard more money. A few students received this email from the HLS financial aid office earlier this month:

In processing your application for aid, we note that you have indicated you will be working less than 10 weeks this summer. The official policy of the law school is to impute a contribution in all circumstances (except medical) when students work less than 10 weeks in the summer. Work in a paid law-related position is not required; the only requirement is that you work in some capacity. You can volunteer or work in a non law-related job if circumstances require you do to so. The best way to ensure that you will not be assessed an imputed contribution for part of the summer is to secure a volunteer position or a second paid job in order to meet the 10 week work requirement.

We understand that for students whose employers have reduced their summer programs for economic reasons, it might be difficult to find additional employment or volunteer opportunities. However, at this point we are not able to promise that our policy will be more flexible. If you are not able to meet the 10-week requirement after making an effort to explore other options, you can submit an appeal at the end of the summer to have the imputed portion of your student contribution reduced or eliminated. We will ask you to explain the circumstances and the steps you took to try to meet the 10-week work requirement. In making appeals decisions, the Financial Aid Committee will consider how widespread summer employment reductions were, the timing of your first notification that your summer employment was reduced, and your demonstration of a sustained effort to meet the 10 week work requirement.

Is this policy fair? HLS officials change course, after the jump.

Wait, there are people out there who want banking lawyers? Really? This is excellent news!

Morgan Lewis & Bockius announced today that it has acquired eleven people: five partners and six associates, from Bingham McCutchen’s Boston office. But the real shocker is that all of the lawyers are from Bingham’s Banking and Leveraged Finance Group:

Morgan Lewis today announced the addition of five partners and six associates from Bingham McCutchen’s Banking and Leveraged Finance Group—including a former co-chair of the practice—to its Business and Finance Practice, resident in the firm’s Boston office. Partners Robert A.J. Barry, Jonathan K. Bernstein, Sula R. Fiszman, Matthew F. Furlong, and Sandra J. Vrejan, will focus their practice on corporate finance, as well as restructuring. Their experience across a broad range of industries—including retail, manufacturing, food and beverage, energy, media, communications and sports—add to the depth of knowledge Morgan Lewis offers clients as they face today’s rapidly changing economic conditions. In addition, their arrival significantly increases the firm’s presence in Boston.

Isn’t it great to live in a world where law firms need corporate finance lawyers?

“Particularly in light of the difficult credit markets faced by both our lender and borrower clients, there is an ever-increasing need for us to be able to provide additional top-flight financing expertise across a multitude of industries” said Firm Chair Francis M. Milone. “This expansion reflects our continued commitment to providing clients with the kind of counsel they need to execute credit transactions in any business environment.”

It seems right to focus on “any” business environment, considering that the politicians seem to be making it up as they go along.

A statement from Bingham and the the Morgan Lewis press release after the jump.

Congratulations to newlyweds Stefanie Schneider and David Alpert, voted Couple of the Week by ATL readers in last week’s LEWW poll.

Today, our five May Couples of the Week compete for Couple of the Month honors. It’s a very strong field, including an Olympic medalist, a Wachtell associate, and a wedding officiated by a future Supreme Court Justice. Here are the couples:

1. Leslie Tobin and Nathan Ostrander

2. JoAnn Kamuf and Rusty Ward

3. Sada Jacobson and Brendan Bâby

4. Sabrina Charles and Jamie Dycus

5. Jessica Hertz and Christopher Angell

Vote for your favorite, after the jump.

Yesterday we participated in an extremely interesting panel discussion, Breaking Back into a Large Law Firm: How to Make Your Way Back into a Top Law Firm. It was part of a day-long conference, co-sponsored by the New York City Bar and Vault, entitled Getting Back in the Game: How to Restart Your Career in a Down Economy.

The panel consisted of:

BRIAN DALTON (moderator), Managing Editor, Vault.com, and Editor, Vault Guide to the Top 100 Law Firms;

JOHN J. CANNON III, Hiring Partner, Shearman & Sterling LLP;

T.J. DUANE, Principal, Lateral Link;

HELEN LONG, Director Legal Recruiting at Ropes & Gray LLP; and

DAVID LAT, Founding Editor, AboveTheLaw.com.

Write-ups of the discussion have appeared on the websites of the New York Times, Vault, and the ABA Journal. We recommend them to you.

We’ve also prepared our own summary of the discussion, which goes into greater detail than the other write-ups. It tackles such topics as general recommendations for the job search, when to use a recruiter (and when not to), how contract work is viewed by prospective employers, and what happens to your résumé after you send it into the cyber-ether and it arrives at a firm.

Read more, after the jump.